0 
0 
0 

8 

7  i 
4  i 

n 

4  | 


Some  Thoughts  On  Judaism 

By 

Joseph  R.  Brandon 


UNIVERSITY  OF 
AT   LOS 


ROBERT  ERNEST  COWAN 


SOME  THOUGHTS 


J  U  D  A  I S  M 


T"\A7"O 


DELIVERED  MAY,    187!) 


TIIK    Y.    M.    H.    A.,    SAN    FltAXci.se  u 


JOSEPH  R.   BRANDON. 


S  A  N    FRANCISCO: 

Ml    ITHU- 

1881. 


SOME  THOUGHTS 


ON 


JUDAISM 


DELIVEEED  MAY,  1879 


BEFOltE    THE   Y.    M.    H.    A.,    SAN   FRANCISCO 


JOSEPH  R.  BRANDON, 


SAN  FKANCISCO.' 

M.  WEISS,  PRINTER  AND  PUBLISHED  BATTEUY  ST.,  COR.  COMMERCIAL. 

1881. 


"SOME  THOUGHTS  ON  JUDAISM." 


TWO  LECTURES 

— BY — 

J.  R.  BRANDON. 


LADIES  AND  GENTLEMEN  : — 

THE  subject  which  I  have  chosen  for  my 
remarks  this  evening,  is  one  which  should  be 
interesting  to  most  of  you  as  Jews,  and  may 
perhaps  as  disturbing  their  prejudices,  be  some- 
what so  to  any  Christian  and  non-Jewish  friends 
and  fellow  citizens  who  may  be  among  my 
«  audience.  And  to  these  latter  I  would  here  take 

i 

the  opportunity  of  explaining,  as  I  shall  frequently 
:  have  occasion  to  use  the  word  Christianity,  that 
I  in  doing  so  I  intend  to  refer  to  dogmatic  Chris- 
i  tianity,  to  the  Christianity  of  the  Church  whether 
==  Protestant  or  Catholic,  and  not  to  that  religion 
•  which    it,   is    the    fashion    now-a-days   for   many 
3  Christian  clergymen  to  preach   to  their  congre- 
gations and  call  Christianity.     I  do  not  refer,  for 
instance,  to  that  Christianity  so  called  which  the 
Rev.   Mr.  Beecher  preaches,   when   he   intimates 
that  we  Jews  may  be  very  good  Christians,  by 
fulfilling    the    teachings    of   Judaism  ;    for    that 
necessarily  I  conceive  must  be  Judaism.    My  mind 
realizes  what  I  think  the  world  is  beginning  now 
fully  to  realize,  and  that  is,  what  Auerbach  in  his 

304796 


[4] 

little  novel  of  "Poet  and  Merchant"  puts  into 
the  mouth  of  Lessing,  whom  he  makes  say:  "The 
religion  of  Christ,  and  the  Christian  religion  are 
two  quite  different  things.  The  religion  of  Christ 
is  that  which  he  himself,  as  man,  also  recognized 
and  practised,  which  every  man  can  have  in 
common  with  him,  and  that  is  love  and  humanity; 
the  Christian  religion  is  that  which  assumes  it  as 
true  that  he  was  more  than  man,  and  which 
makes  him  as  such  the  object  of  its  worship." 

With  so  much  of  introduction  and  explanation 
then  our  subject  is  "JUDAISM,"  a  word  perhaps  as 
much  misunderstood  as  any  word  in  our  language. 
It  will  be  my  endeavor  to-night  to  expose  some 
of  the  misconceptions  which  have  been  formed 
concerning  it,  to  clear  it  somewhat  from  the 
mist  of  prejudice  which  has  surrounded  it,  and 
to  place  it  in  that  clear  light  and  favorable 
position,  to  which  I  believe  its  merits  entitle  it.  It 
will  be  scarcely  possible  within  the  limits  of  two 
short  lectures  to  do  more  than  treat  the  subject 
in  a  somewhat  general  and  discursive  manner, 
and  you  will  hardly  expect  from  me,  a  mere 
layman,  that  learned,  profound,  and  authoritative 
exposition  that  the  subject  would  be  apt  to 
receive  from  some  of  our  learned  ministers, 
upon  whose  manor  you  may  perhaps  think  I  am 
trespassing  in  my  selection  of  a  theme.  It  may 
still  however  not  be  inappropriate  to  discuss  it. 
The  more  simple  mode  of  treatrnent  may  have  its 
advantages,  as  being  addressed  to  a  class  of  minds 
not  open  to,  or  a  frame  of  mind  not  prepared  for 
the  more  elaborate  and  profound  one  :  even  as 
the  light  musketry  of  an  army  will  often  reach 
where  its  heavy  artillery  cannot  operate,  and 
I  shall  certainly  not  exhaust  the  subject,  for  the 


[5] 

misconceptions  are  numerous  enough,  and  the 
prejudices  deep  seated,  and  wide  extended  enough 
to  warrant  and  need  the  services  of  all  the  light 
musketry  and  heavy  artillery,  volunteers  and 
regulars,  that  can  be  brought  to  bear  for  their 
eradication  and  removal. 

I  have  often  read  in  books  of  travel  of  a 
peculiarity  of  the  residences  of  our  co-religionists 
in  those  lands  where  religious  persecution  has 
not  yet  died  out,  and  where  the  fear  of  the 
fanaticism  of  an  ignorant  multitude  which  ever 
and  anon  vents  itself  in  the  sacking  of  the 
Jewish  quarter,  yet  haunts  the  minds  of  our 
brethren  in  faith.  The  peculiarity  I  allude  to,  is 
the  striking  contrast  that  exists  between  the 
exteriors  and  the  interiors  of  the  houses  of  Jewish 
families ;  the  former  frequently  exhibiting  a 
poverty  and  meanness  utterly  at  variance  with  the 
wealth,  the  elegance,  and  the  luxury  disclosed 
within.  Something  very  analogous  to  this  will  be 
experienced  in  our  contemplation  and  examination 
of  Judaism  itself,  which  exhibits  very  different 
features  as  seen  from  without,  and  as  seen  from 
within.  Different,  if  viewed  even  through  va 
mental  atmosphere  clear  of  the  mist  and  fog  of 
prejudice;  and  how  much  greater  must  the  contrast 
prove,  when  the  exterior  view  is  taken  through  the 
deceptive  media  of  sectarian  bigotry  and  hatred, 
through  which  it  has  been  too  frequently  the 
custom  of  the  world  to  regard  it. 

The  views  entertained  of  Judaism  will  of  course 
very  much  depend  on  the  amount  of  intelligence 
possessed  by  the  holders,  but  in  all  they  will  be 
found  to  be  more  or  less  warped  and  distorted  by 
sectarian  animosity.  If  I  were  asked  to  give  a 
somewhat  popular  idea  of  Judaism  as  conceived 


[6] 

by  one  class  of  people,  I  should  say  it  was  sup- 
posed to  consist  of  a  horror  of  swine's  flesh,  the 
exaction  of  exorbitant  rates  of  interest,  with  a 
grand  religious  festivity  about  the  time  of  Easter, 
at  which  the  shedding,  and  some  mysterious 
use  of  Christian  blood  were  indulged  in.  That 
would  be  certainly  the  lowest  idea  entertained 
by  some  Christian  people  in  the  old  world ; 
emigrants  from  whom  however  may  even  now  be 
in  process  of  assimilation  among  us  in  cosmopol- 
itan America.  We  are  all  familiar  with  the  sup- 
posed crucial  test  of  Judaism  that  seems  to  suggest 
itself  to  the  mind  of  the  ordinary  gentile,  which 
takes  form  in  the  popular  taunting  rhymes  that 
we  hear  frequently  addressed  to  the  Jew.  It  is 
not  long  ago  that  I  replied  to  a  communication  in 
the  Evening  Bulletin  of  this  city  wherein  was  the 
following  remark  in  reference  to  the  Jews:  "It  will 
be  remembered  that  in  their  dealings  they  are 
governed  by  the  law  of  Moses,  in  which  they 
are  commanded  to  be  usurious  only  with  strangers 
and  gentiles."  And  within  the  last  few  months, 
aye,  within  the  last  month,  I  have  read  an  account 
of  a  revival  in  some  place  in  Europe  of  the  blood 
accusation,  and  of  the  publication  of  two  works  in 
Russia  by  Christian  priests,  the  one  gravely 
making,  the  other  as  gravely  refuting  the  charge. 

A  higher,  and  somewhat  more  flattering  view  is 
that  charitably  indulged  in  by  a  class,  whereof 
the  Pacific  Churchman,  a  newspaper  in  this  city 
would  seem  to  be  the  spokesman.  That  accords 
to  Judaism  at  least  the  recognition  of  its  being 
a  sect,  although  as  thinks  the  writer  of  the  article 
I  refer  to,  we  are  not  a  people.  "The  Jew — thus 
proceeds  the  article — has  no  faith.  He  has  neither 
altar,  priesthood,  nor  sacrifice.  He  can  perform 


[  7  J 

the  writer  you  will  observes  omits  the 
ly — no,  not  ornits,  I  should  rather  say  misplaces, 
for  I  have  found  the  syllable  pretty  generally 
distributed  over  the  entire  article  from  which 
I  extract. — "He  can  perform  scarce  a  single 
religious  service  which  his  own  law  requires,  and 
without  which  that  law  tells  him,  there  is  no 
remission  for  his  sins.  His  religion,  as  written 
in  his  law,  passed  out  of  existence,  and  all  possi- 
bility of  existence  eighteen  hundred  years  ago, 
and  he  has  been  living  since  on  a  bundle  of 
dry  and  dusty  Rabbinism."  A  flattering  picture 
truly  of  our  glorious  religion,  but  painted  by  the 
hand  of  a  churchman  what  can  we  expect? 

A  more  favorable  view  yet,  and  perhaps  the 
highest  entertained  by  those  stranger  to  us,  and 
who  have  not  carefully  examined  the  subject,  is, 
that  it  is  a  religion  having  some  monotheistic  veiws, 
but  overlaid  with  a  gross  anthropomorphism ; 
having  very  little  spirituality,  a  rigid  and  tiresome 
ceremonial,  and  above  all  being  the  religion  of  a 
tribe  or  sect,  particularly  exclusive,  and  not 
a  religion  of  humanity.  To  very  much  this  effect 
wrote  lately  -Professor  Goldwin  Smith  in  so 
enlightened  a  magazine  as  the  Cotemporary.  He 
says,  "The  monotheism  of  the  Jew,  like  that  of 
Islam  is  unreal;"  even  our  monotheism  would 
seem  to  be  begrudged  us. — ''The  Jewish  God, 
thongh  single,  is  not  the  father  of  all,  but  the 
Deity  of  His  chosen  race."  As  I  speak  the  verse 
from  Isaiah,  Ch.  54,  may  perhaps  suggests  itself  to 
your  minds.  "The  God  of  all  the  earth  shall  He 
be  called."  The  morality  embodied  in  the  Mosaic 
code  though  distinctly  tribal,  and  sanctioning  a 
difference  of  principle  between  the  rule  of  deal- 
ing with  a  Hebrew  and  that  of  dealing  with  a 


[8] 

stranger,  which  the  civilized  conscience  now  con- 
demns, was  in  its  day  a  nearer  approach  to  human- 
ity than  any  other  known  tribal  law.  The  noble 
part  of  the  Jewish  nation,  the  real  heirs  of  David 
and  the  prophets"-— the  writer  refers  I  suppose  to 
the  fishermen  of  Galilee  and  the  motley  crowd 
of  communists  who  followed  them — "  heard  the 
gospel,  and  became  the  founders  of  a  human 
religion.  The  less  noble  part  led  by  national 
pride  and  ceremonialism  embodied  in  the  Pharisee 
rejected  humanity,  and  themselves  fell  back  into 
a  narrower  and  harder  tribalism  then  before." 

There  is  no  exaggeration  then  I  think  in  the 
statements  I  have  made  concerning  the  views 
entertained  of  Judaism.  They  are,  if  not  true, 
certainly  consistent  with  the  ideas  concerning 
Jews,  prevalent  at  a  time  within  my  own  memory, 
as  may  be  illustrated  by  the  following  incidents. 

My  sisters  when  I  was  a  boy  attended  a  young 
ladies'  seminary  in  the  suburbs  of  London.  It 
was  an  establishment  situated  in  a  location  where 
one  might  expect  that  persons  of  some  intelli- 
gence would  reside.  While  there  they  made  the 
acquaintance  of  a  young  lady  who  resided  next 
door  to  the  school.  In  a  conversation  had  with 
the  youug  lady  in  question  one  of  my  sisters 
informed  her  that  she  was  a  Jewess.  The  infor- 
mation seemed  quite  to  surprise  the  young  lady. 
"What,"  exclaimed  she,  "you  a  Jewess?  why  I 
thought  all  Jewesses  had  beards !"  Another 
instance  was  that  of  a  Jewish  captain — yes 
mirabile  dictu  a  Jewish  sea  captain — who  was 
running  a  schooner  between  Jamaica  and  some 
of  the  neighbouring  islands.  I  had  the  tale 
from  himself.  He  had  on  one  of  his  trips  a 
passenger,  to  whom  in  the  course  of  conversation 


[9] 

he  disclosed  the  fact  of  his  being  a  Jew,  which 
would  certainly  not  be  surmised  from  his  vocation. 
Some    nights    after    he    was    disturbed    by    the 
passenger  creeping  up  to  his  berth,  and  passing 
his  hand  over  it  as  if  feeling  for  something.    What 
on  earth  do  you  want,  cried   the  captain  jumping 
up,    hunting   round    my    bunk    in    this  manner  ? 
Well,  said  the  passenger  in  reply,  to  tell  you  the 
truth  captain,  I  had  always  heard  that  Jews  had 
tails,    and    thinking    you    were    asleep    I    was 
determined  to  satisfy  myself.     Probably  many  of 
you  from  Europe  may  recall  similar  foolish  and 
absurd  ideas  prevalent  among  the  Christian  popu- 
lations, which  might  well  provoke  a  smile  were  the 
ignorance  which  they  bespeak  not  so  fraught  with 
danger.      If  that  was  the  idea  concerning  Jews 
possessed    by    some    people    not    utterly    unen- 
lightened within  the  British  dominions  not  much 
more  than  thirty-five  to  forty  years  ago.  we  need 
hardly  be  surprised  at  the  conceptions  formed  of 
Judaism    at  the  present  day.     Association   with 
the  Jew,  which  has  of  late  years  become  much 
more  intimate,  would  certainly  correct  such  foolish 
conceptions,  and  disclose  to  the  gentiles  that  the 
Jewess  was  not  a  bearded  prodigy,  nor  the  Jew 
Mr.  Darwin's  missing  link,  but  that  they  were  men 
and  women  in  all  respects  like  themselves.     But 
the  association  has  not  been  intimate  enough  to 
remove    their    prejudices,     and    the    false    ideas 
entertained  concerning  Judaism. 

It  may  however  in  all  candor  be  asked  whether 
we  Jews  ourselves  have  sufficiently  understood 
what  Judaism  really  is  ;  and  it  may  also  be 
remarked  as  to  some  of  the  popular  conceptions 
concerning  Judaism,  whether  it  is  not  possible 
that  they  may  have  been  in  some  measure  in 


[10] 

fluenced,  if  not  originated  by  a  class  among  our 
nation — unfortunately  through  the  crushing  perse- 
cutions we  have  undergone  not  a  small  one — who 
are  not  very  highly  imbued  with  the  grand  prin- 
ciples of  our  faith,  but  whose  expression  of  it 
consists  of  the  merest  empty  ceremonial,  or  the 
practice  of  some  foolish  superstitions,  represent- 
ing Judaism  very  much  as  the  dregs  of  wine 
represent  the  rosy  sparkling  juice,  'that  gladdeneth 
the  heart  of  man.'  We  do  not  however  form  our 
opinion  of  generous  old  wine  from  the  dregs;  nor 
is  it  just  to  judge  of  Judaism  by  the  lowest 
stratum  of  the  Jewish  people,  however  favor- 
able it  may  compare,  and  statistics  show  that  it 
does  compare  very  favorably  with  the  like  class 
among  the  surrounding  populations,  although  in 
the  seething  cauldron  of  modern  civilized  life  it 
should  occasionally  change  its  position  and  come 
near  the  surface.  But  that  is  but  a  small  element 
towards  the  formation  of  the  false  ideas  and  im- 
pressions concerning  Judaism,  which  I  have  quoted 
and  shown  to  exist.  The  true  reason  for  them  lies 
deeper,  and  is  in  a  great  measure,  I  think,  the 
following.  Mankind  as  a  rule  are  not  too  fond 
of  mental  exertion,  and  it  requires  frequently 
considerable  mental  exertion  to  form  opinions  on 
any  subject  which  shall  be  correct  and  true;  if 
even  men  have  the  time  to  devote  to  the  neces- 
sary examination.  It  is  a  great  deal  easier  to 
accept  opinions  ready  made  to  hand,  or  rather  T 
might  say  to  head,  as  most  men  do  their  hats, 
furnishing  the  lining  as  they  do  the  covering  of 
their  heads  with  the  ready  made  article.  I  may 
pursue  the  analogy  and  say,  that  there  are 
factories  of  opinions  as  there  are  of  hats  from 
which  the  mass  of  mankind  obtain  their  supplies. 


[11] 

There  are  now-a-days  two  great  factories  of 
the  interior  furnishing  spoken  of : — one  is  the 
Church,  the  other  the  press.  Eat  formerly,  and 
until  very  recent  times  the  Church  was  the 
originator  of  all  opinions  having  any  reference 
to,  or  bearing  on,  or  in  any  way  connected  with 
religious  topics.  It  too  often  indeed  sought 
to  extend  its  jurisdiction,  and  endeavoured  to 
control  those  having  reference  to  science  and 
philosophy;  but  science  and  philosophy  have 
fortunately  for  mankind  emancipated  themselves 
from  its  control,  and  no  longer  think  and  speak 
at  the  command  of  the  priest.  But  this  by  the 
way  ;  we  are  now  only  concerned  with  the  Church 
as  the  great  opinion  factory  concerning  Judaism: 
for  it  is  from  it  I  think  that  all  those  prejudices, 
and  false  impressions  concerning  Jews  and  Judaism 
have  .mainly  emanated. 

The  principles  of  Jesuitism  existed  before  the 
time  of  Ignatius  Loyola,  and  long  before  his  time 
the  justification  of  the  means  by  the  end  proposed 
was  a  principle  of  the  Church.  It  did  not 
scruple,  therefore,  where  its  interests  were  con- 
cerned to  use  the  vilification  of  the  Jew,  and 
the  misrepresentation  of  Judaism  as  the  means 
towards  advancing  those  interests,  or  strengthen- 
ing its  power. 

When  Christianity  no  longer  a  mere  Jewish 
sect,  cut  loose  from  Judaism  and  allied  itself  with 
paganism,  the  contrast  between  the  followers  of 
the  two  religions  was  a  striking  one.  The  ignor- 
ant, the  illiterate,  the  vulgar,  the  poor  were 
mainly  the  followers  of  Christianity.  The 
learned,  the  cultured,  the  wealthy,  the  refined 
of  the  Jewish  nation  remained  true  to  Juda- 
ism. Everywhere,  in  Palestine,  in  Babylon, 


[12] 

throughout  the  captivity,  academies  and  houses  of 
learning  were  established  and  supported.     These 
continued   to   exist,  and  nourished  with  the   ac- 
companying enlightenment  among  the  Jews   all 
through  the  middle  ages.   "Many  of  them,   says 
Prof.     Schleiden,     soon     became     so     favorably 
known   that  they   were  attended    by    Christians, 
and    even     Christian     theologians,     who    almost 
lacked    opportunities    for  intellectual    training." 
What    meantime    became   the    condition    of    the 
Christian  world  under  the    rule  of  the  Church? 
We   will  confine  our  view   solely    to   education, 
disregarding  its  teachings   as  regards  commerce, 
government,  etc.      Its  attitude  towards  education 
and  science  was  that  of  an  enemy.     Reason  and 
intellectual  light  were  not  favorable  to  its  dogmas. 
They  were  consequently  denounced  and  opposed 
by  the   fathers  of  the  Church  ;  to  what  extent, 
and  how  successfully,  let  the  burning  of  the  great 
Alexandrian  library  by  a  mob  of  Christian  priests, 
afterwards  falsely  attributed  to  the  Caliph  Omar: 
let  the  destruction  by  Torquemada  the  Inquisitor 
of  the  great  library  of  Cordova  containing  200,000 
volumes  :   let    the   darkness  of  the  middle  ages, 
to    a   great   extent    the    effect   of    the    work    of 
the  Church  illustrate.      Mr.  Lecky  in  his  History 
of   Rationalism    describing    this    condition   says: 
"The   constant    exaltation    of    blind    faith,    the 
countless    miracles,    the     childish     legends,    all 
produced    a   -condition     of    besotted    ignorance, 
of   grovelling  and  trembling  credulity   that   can 
scarcely  be  paralleled    except   among    the   most 
degraded  barbarians." 

With  light  then  opposed  to  darkness,  intelligence 
to  gross  ignorance,  was  it  not  natural  that  the 
Church  should  fear  the  influence  of  Judaism  as 


[13] 

represented  by  the  Jew,  should  look  upon  the 
Jew  as  the  foe  of  the  Church,  the  protestant  against 
its  idolatry,  its  paganism  into  which  primitive 
Christianity  had  been  absorbed,  its  priest-craft. 
And  what  was  natural  took  place.  It  did  fear 
its  recognized  foe,  and  sought  by  every  means  in 
its  power  to  crush  and  destroy  it..  It  made  war 
upon.  Judaism  as  it  made  war  on  science,  reason  and 
philosophy.  It  expurgated  and  sought  to  destroy 
our  religious  writings.  It  burned  by  the  cartload 
our  Talmuds.  It  fraudulently  interpolated  our 
histories.  It  would  have  burned  and  crushed  the 
Jew  and  the  intelligence  he  then  represented,  out 
of  existence,  but  that  the  hand  of  Providence 
preserved  him.  How  strenuous  were  its  efforts  to 
this  end  let  the  annals  of  history,  and  the  sad, 
sad  story  of  Israel's  persecutions,  martyrdoms,  and 
consequent  degradation  attest.  Association  with 
the  Jew  was  to  be  prevented  by  the  instillation 
into  the  minds  of  the  people  of  a  religious  hatred 
towards  him.  The  teachings  of  Judaism  were  to 
be  misrepresented,  and  Judaism  maligned  that 
those  of  Christianity  should  appear  in  a  more 
favorable  light.  The  light  it  had  borrowed  from 
Judaism  was  to  be  passed  off  as  original.  Its  sup- 
posed spirituality  and  brightness  were  to  receive  a 
foil  in  Judaism.  Judaism  was  to  be  background 
of  the  picture  painted  in  darkness  and  shade  to  set 
off  the  bright  coloring  of  the  foreground.  Like 
the  victim  of  the  highwayman  who  is  beaten  and 
maltreated  after  being  robbed,  Judaism  despoiled 
of  its  ethics  by  the  Church  was  maltreated, 
maligned,  crushed,  persecuted,  and  crowded  out 
of  all  social  contact,  and  was  glad  to  hide  away 
in  holes  and  ghettos,  and  preserve  there  amidst 
every  difficulty  the  flickering,  but  undying  flame 


[14] 

of  which  it  was  the  custodian.     Meanwhile   the 
misrepresentations  of  the  Church  concerning  Jud- 
aism were  industriously  propagated.    The  opinions 
that  the  Church  deemed  most  for  its  interest  to 
be  entertained  were  diligently  disseminated,  and 
with  the  power  of  falsehood  to  maintain  its  life 
have  continued  to  exist    until    the   present    day. 
Truly  has  it  been  said  by  a  very  pleasant  .writer, 
Professor   Matthews   of   Chicago  :     "  When    once 
the  world  has  got  hold  of  a  lie  it  is  astonishing 
how    hard    it  is    to    get    it   out    of    the    world. 
You  beat  it  on  the  head,  and  it  seems  to  have 
given  up   the    ghost,  and  lo  the  next  day — like 
Zachary  Taylor  who  did  not  know  he  was  whipped 
by  Santa  Anna — it  is  alive  and  as  lusty  as  ever. 
Hence  it  is,  I  think,  that  we  have  the  false  and 
erroneous  conceptions   concerning  Judaism   that 
we  see  prevailing  in  the  world.     We  read  them  in 
the  earliest  Christian  writings  when  the  compilers 
of  the  Gospels  put  into  the  mouth  of  Jesus  their 
first  recorded  misrepresentation  of  Jewish  doctrine, 
making  him  say,  "Ye  have  heard  that  it  hath  been 
said,  an  eye  for  an  eye,  a  tooth  for  a  tooth,  but  I 
say  unto  you,  resist  not  evil."     Who  among  the 
adherents  of  Christianity  even  in  these  days,  and 
how  much  more  in  olden  times,  hearing  this  would 
not    imagine    that   Judaism    taught  revenge  and 
retaliation,  instead  of  these  feelings  being  utterly 
repugnant  to    it?     We    have    here  one    of    those 
hydra-headed     falsehoods     that    would     require 
another  Hercules  to  destroy.     I  have  frequently 
had  occasion  to  beat  in  on  the  head,  but  expect 
to  meet  with  it  as  lively  as  ever  shortly,  so  I  will 
even  put  the  stick  into  your  hands  that  you  may 
assist  in  its  destruction  whenever  you  may  meet 
with  it. 


[15] 

These  words,  "an  eye  for  an  eye,  a  tooth  for 
a  tooth,"  as  read  in  the  English  Bible,  read  in  the 
original  Hebrew,  "  eye  against  eye,  tooth  against 
tooth,  hand  against  hand,"  in  one  place.  In  two 
others  literally  "eye  under  eye,  tooth  under 
tooth,  hand  under  han$."  The  expression  would 
seem  to  be  the  Hebrew  equivalent  for  the 
expressive  English  phrase  'evenhanded  justice.' 
As  one  eye  is  like  the  other,  as  one  tooth  is  like 
the  corresponding  one,  as  one  hand  is  like  the 
other,  so  exact  shall  be  your  administration  of 
justice.  The  phase  is  never  used  in  any  other 
sense.  In  the  instances  in  which  it  is  used  it  re- 
fers to  cases  of  judicial  punishment ;  one  where 
punishment  is  meted  out  to  the  false  witness  ; 
Deut.  Ch.  19,  v.  16-21;  another  where  damages 
are  to  be  awarded  by  the  judge  for  injury  suffered 
by  a  woman:  Ex.  Ch.  21,  v.  22-29;  the  third 
where  damages  are  to  be  awarded  for  personal 
injury,  or  blemish  inflicted;  Lev.  Ch.  24,  v.  20. 
Where  redress  of  one's  own  wrongs  is  spoken 
of. a  very  different  doctrine  is  announced.  "Thou 
shalt  not  avenge  nor  bear  a  grudge,"  Lev.  Ch.  19. 
And  our  sages  commenting  on  this  have  given  so 
beautiful  an  explanation  that  [  repeat  it  hero  for 
the  benefit  of  those  to  whom  it  may  be  new,  and 
judging  from  my  experience  it  will  be  new  to  very 
many  of  my  Christian  friends.  "If  some  one  has 
denied  thee  a  favor,  says  the  Talmud,  and  desires 
at  any  time  thereafter  any  service  from  thee,  thou 
shalt  not  refuse  it  to  him  ;  for  it  is  said  :  Thou 
shalt  not  avenge!  Neither  must  thou  say  to  him, 
'Behold  I  serve  thee  now,  although  thou  didst 
refuse  the  favor  I  asked  of  thee.'  As  soon  as  thou 
speakest  thus,  thou  hast  transgressed  the  com- 
mandment, 'Thou  shalt  not  bear  a  grudge.' '  In 


[16] 

what    light   does    this    place    the    words   of   the 
Gospel  imputed  to  Jesus? 

Another  more  transparent  falsity  imputed  to 
him, — I  say  in  each  case  imputed,  because  it  is 
impossible  to  believe  that  he  was  either  so 
ignorant  as  not  to  know,  or  so  disingenuous  as  to 
misrepresent  the  true  meaning,  cr  the  facts  is— 
''Ye  have  heard  that  it  hath  been  said,  ye  shall 
love  your  neighbor  and  hate  your  enemy."  An 
expression  the  like  of  which  is  not  to  be  found  in 
any  known  Jewish  writing ;  but  on  the  contrary  we 
have  besides  the  injunction  just  quoted  as  to  the 
non-indulgence  of  revenge,  the  express  commands. 
'If  thou  meet  thy  enemy's  ox  or  his  ass  going 
astray,  thou  shalt  surely  bring  him  back  to  him 
again.  If  thou  see  the  ass  of  him  that  hateth  thee 
lying  under  his  burdpn,  and  would'st  forbear  to 
unload  him,  thou  must  not  do  so,  but  thou  shalt 
surely  unload  with  him,"  Exod.  Ch.  24,  v.  4-5. 
Again;  uAt  the  fall  of  thy  enemy  do  not  rejoice  ; 
and  at  his  stumbling  let  not  thy  heart  be  glad, 
lest  the  Lord  see  it  and  it  be  displeasing  in  his 
eyes."  Prov.  Ch.  24.  v.  17-18.  And  the  spirit 
of  Israel's  sages  on  this  subject  is  thus  beautifully 
illustrated.  On  all  our  festivals  there  is  appointed 
to  be  read  a  certain  psalm  service,  called  the 
Hallel  or  Praise.  This  is  completely  read  on  all 
the  festivals  excepting  the  Passover.  And  why 
not  then?  In  deference  to  the  overthrown 
Egyptians,  say  the  Talmudists,  lest  our  rejoicing 
over  a  fallen  enemy  should  seem  too  great. 

That  we  read  of  men  in  the  Bible  history  who 
disregarded  these  precepts,  as  they  did  even  more 
important  ones,  and  indulged  in  the  most  vindic- 
tive and  revengeful  conduct,  is  certainly  no  incul- 
cation of  a  contrary  doctrine;  although  I  have 


[17] 

heard  some  people  seriously  argue  so,  as  if  the}7 
thought  every  character  in  the  Bible  history  was 
an  example  to  be  followed,  and  never  one  to  be 
avoided. 

With  such  misrepresentations,  and  misstatements 
to  start  with,  read  continually  throughout  Christen- 
dom in  its  churches,  taught  to  the  young  in  their 
Sunday  schools,  with  other  similar  and  equally 
false  representations  of  Jews  and  Jewish  doctrine, 
can  it  be  wondered  that  the  intelligent  laity 
misapprehend  Judaism?  that  even  Christian 
clergymen  are  often  equally  ignorant  on  the 
subject  of  Jewish  doctrine?  I  remember  once 
surprising  a  Christian  clergyman  very  much  by 
pointing  out  to  him  in  Leviticus  Ch.  19,  v.  18,  as 
Jewish  doctrine  that  had  been  appropriated  by 
Christianity  the  text  "Thou  shalt  love  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself."  He  had  cited  it  to  me  as 
a  principle  entirely  new  in  Christianity  for  which 
it  was  not  indebted  to  Judaism. 

Can  it  be  wondered  in  view  of  such  ignorance 
and  misapprehension,  that  we  see  the  glorious 
principles  of  Judaism  taken  verbatim  et  literatim 
from  our  sacred  writings,  quoted  in  the  pages  of 
general  literature  as  Christian  doctrine  and  Juda- 
ism therein  entirely  ignored  ?  Can  it  be  wondered 
that  seen  through  all  this  fog  and  mist  of  prejudice, 
these  clouds  of  ignorance  that  the  views  of  Juda- 
ism should  have  been  so  distorted?  Can  it  be 
wondered  in  view  of  all  this  misrepresentation, 
misapprehension,  prejudice,  and  ignorance,  that 
Christianity  should  have  been  exalted  on  high, 
and  Judaism  degraded  in  the  world's  eyes  ? 

The  veil  however  is  lifting.  In  the  words 
of  an  eminent  American  poet  lately  deceased 


[18] 

Truth,  crushed  to  earth  will  rise  again. 
The  Eternal  years  of  God  are  her's; 
But  error,  wounded,  writhes  in  pain, 
And  dies  amid  its  worshippers. 

The  triumph  of  Christianity  over  Judaism  is 
drawing  to  a  close.  There  is  a  vivid  picture  in 
the  ''Life  Drama"  of  Alexander  Smith,  which 
so  admirably  applies  to  this  triumph,  and  may 
represent  the  rise  of  Christianity,  that  I  am 
tempted  to  quote  it.  The  scene  he  paints  is  the 
setting  Sun  and  the  rising  Moon. 

"  What  image  "  asks  Violet, 
' '  Would  you  draw  from  this  ?  " 

"  Why  this— 

The  Sun  is  dying  like  a  cloven  King, 
In  his  own  blood,  the  while  the  distant  Moon, 
Like  a  pale  prophetess  whom  he  has  wronged, 
Leans  eager  forward  with  most  hungry  eyes, 
Watching  him  bleed  to  death,  and  as  he  faints, 
She  brightens  and  dilates;  Revenge  complete, 
She  walks  in  lonely  triumph  through  the  night." 

But  the  darkness  and  the  night  which  she  ruled 
with  the  reflected  light  of  the  sunken  orb  is 
passing  away.  A  new  day  of  Judaism  is  dawn- 
ing, and  her  light  is  paling.  The  mind  of  man 
awakening  at  the  dawn  is  passing  from  the  con- 
trol of  the  Church.  The  highest  intelligence  of 
humanity  like  the  mountain  ranges  first  reflect- 
ing the  light,  no  longer  accepts  its  dogmas.  An 
apparent  conformity  doubtless  exists  even  among 
the  intelligent,  and  many  there  are  outside  of  the 
mass  and  multitude  still  accepting  uninquiringly 
the  old  doctrines,  who  having  abandoned  all  belief 
in  the  dogmas,  yet  have  not  braved  public  opinion 
in  announcing  their  desertion,  and  who  are  not 
prepared  to  meet  the  petty  persecution  with  which 
the  Church  and  its  followers  invariably  visit 
those  who  fall  away  from  it.  My  assertion  may 


[19] 

perhaps  surprise  some  yet  credulous  minds  who 
are  not  aware  of  the  progress  of  human  thought. 
I  will  therefore  substantiate  my  assertion  with 
the  following  extracts  from  the  works  of  writers 
who  are  familar  with  the  subject. 

I  quote  first  from  a  work  of  W.  B.  Alger, 
entitled  ;'  Rocks  Ahead."  "I  believe  it  to  be  true, 
writes  he,  that  the  strongest  mental  power,  the 
purest  thought,  the  highest  intelligence  among  us, 
is  yearly  diverging  more  and  more  from  Chris- 
tianity, is  discarding  all  faith  in  it,  assuming 
towards  it  not  so  much  a  hostile,  as  an  isolated, 
neutral,  almost  supercilious  attitude  which  may 
perhaps  best  be  described  as  one  of  silent  renun- 
ciation and  disapproval — of  looking  and  passing 
by  on  the  other  side.  The  preponderant  intellect 
in  every  line,  statesmanlike,  legal,  scholarly, 
scientific,  literary,  industrial — is  no  longer  be- 
lieving-, is  as  a  rule  distinctly  unbelieving,  and 
I  venture  to  say  this  in  the  face  of  such  flagrant, 
and  splendid  contradictions  as  are  offered  by  the 
names  of  Gladstone,  Selborne,  Acton,  Faraday 
and  Wordsworth,  well  knowing  also,  that  the  still 
greater  names  I  might,  if  it  were  not  unseemly, 
quote  in  proof  of  my  assertion.,  would  in  many 
cases  not  be  ready  to  avow  their  disbelief,  and 
in  some  would  resent  its  being  attributed  to  them. 
In  a  country  like  England  where  conformity  to  at 
least  some  form  of  Christianity  is  enforced  by 
still  extant  legal  penalties  of  a  very  harsh 
character,  and  by  social  penalties  nearly  as 
intolerant  and  severe,  it  is  not  easy  to  avow  entire 
dissent  to  the  national  creed,  and  therefore  the 
weight  and  numbers  of  such  dissenters  will  never 
be  accurately  known  till  they  have  become 
predominant." 


[20] 

Again,  "A  very  large  proportion,  probably  the 
majority  of  the  operative  classes  in  towns  are 
total  unbelievers  ;  and  these  are  not  the  reckless 
and  disreputable,  but  on  the  contrary,  consist  of 
the  best  of  the  skilled  workman,  the  most  instructed 
and  thoughtful  as  well  as  the  steadiest.  The  hard 
headed,  industrious,  reading  engineers  and  fore- 
men, the  members  of  Mechanics  Institutes,  the 
natural  leaders  of  the  artisans,  are  sceptics 
intellectually  not  morally  ;  they  disbelieve  because 
they  have  inquired,  argued;  and  observed,  and 
have  been  unable  to  obtain  from  their  inethodist 
fellow  workmen,  or  even  from  ministers  of  the 
Gospel  satisfactory  answers  to  their  doubts. 
Among  manufacturing  artisans,  and  the  highest 
description  of  citizen  laborers,  it  may  be  stated 
with  even  more  confidence  than  of  the  ranks  above 
them  in  the  social  scale,  that  the  intellect  of  the 
body  is  already  divorced  from  the  prevalent 
creeds  of  the  country." 

From  a  work  of  Moncure  D.  Con  way  entitled 
"Idols  and  Ideals,"  among  much  to  the  same  effect 
as  the  foregoing!  extract  the  following.  ''Thus, 
whether  we  listen  to  the  conclusions  of  science, 
philosphy,  and  literature  on  the  philosophy  and 
authentication  of  Christianity,  or  whether  we 
listen  to  the  voice  of  the  people,  as  uttered  in 
actions  that  speak  louder  than  words,  we  receive 
a  cumulative  verdict  that  Christianity  has  a  name 
to  live,  but  is  dead."  It  might  seem  perhaps 
more  correct  to  say  dying,  but  a  reference  to 
what  follows  in  the  work  will  explain  the  use  of 
the  word.  "The  reality  of  it,  says  the  same 
thoughtful  writer,  has  passed  away.  Its  name  now 
represents  the  effort  of  a  lucrative  institution  to 
survive  into  and  though  a  civilization  built  up 


[21] 

point  for  point  against  its  protest  and  its  errors. 
That  effort  may  continue  for  a  while,  but  it  is 
hopeless." 

If  we  required  further  proof  of  the  decay 
of  dogmatic  Christianity,  we  need  only  let 
our  mind's  eye  look  back  for  a  thousand  years  at 
the  conflicting  doctrines  of  the  two  faiths  as  at 
two  supposed  parallel  lines,  and  what  do  we  see? 
Do  we  see  any  concession  on  the  part  of  Judaism? 
None.  In  spite  of  the  most  grinding  and  terrible 
persecutions,  in  spite  of  inquisitions,  racks, 
banishments,  auto-da  -fes,  massacres,  ghettos, 
gaberdines,  social  ostracism,  none.  But  we  see 
the  line  representing  Christianity  at  the  period 
of  which  I  speak,  diverging  towards  Judaism. 
We  see  every  shade  of  religious  opinion  between 
the  old  Catholicism,  and  pure  Jewish  theism. 
Some  of  the  sects  diverging  from  the  old  church 
which  -are  almost  Jewish  in  their  doctrines  ;  with 
whom  the  Jew  non-observant  of  the  ceremonial  of 
his  religion  almost  meets  on  common  ground;  who 
represent  religious  ideas  and  opinions  such  as  were 
entertained  by  those  who  were  known  in  the  Jew- 
ish Church  as  "proselytes  of  the  Gate."  The 
following  as  a  sample  of  these  ideas,  is  from 
a  sermon  preached  in  London  on  Easter  Sun  day  of 
last  year  by  the  Rev.  Charles  Voysey,  minister  of 
a  religious  denomination  which  has  abandoned 
the  errors  of  the  Christian  Church,  and  is  known 
as  Moral  theism. 

"For  my  part  I  cannot  but  wholly  endorse  the 
pious,  and  wise  reflections  of  the  Rabbi  Cohen, 
(he  has  been  reading  from  the  Deicides  pp.  252- 
255.  288-290,)  which  I  have  already  read  to  you 
as  lessons  this  morning,  and  regard  Christianity 
like  every  other  movement  which  has  influenced 


[22] 

the  world,  as  one  out  of  many  agencies  by  which 
an  ever  ruling  Providence  is  ever   leading   men 
from  stage  to  stage,  nearer  to  the  truth  and  to 
Himself:    that    Christianity    was   a    bridge    from 
paganism    to    Judaism,    and    that  while    it    was 
pursuing  its  path  of  conquest  in  much  darkness  of 
mind,  and  unworthiness  of  purpose,  it  was  doing 
Divine  work  in  clearing  the  way  of  our  benighted 
forefathers  towards  the  attainment  of  the    best, 
truest,  and  purest  faith  which  the  world  has  ever 
seen.     Christians  may  dream  of  their  coming  mil- 
lennium  when    the   Jews   will    be  converted    to 
Christianity.      Sooner    shall    the  sun  retrace  his 
steps  from  noon  to  dawn,  or  the  moon  forsake  her 
parent   earth    for  an  orbit  around  Jupiter,  than 
God's  chosen  people  forsake   their   ancient   and 
most  sublime  faith  for  the  meretricious  idolatries, 
and  the  half-pagan    mysticism    of  the    Christian 
faith.     Christendom,  if  I  am  right,  is  now  on  the 
eve  of  a  new  and  grander  reformation,  and  will 
soon  fling  its  idols  to  the  moles  and  the  bats,  and 
cast  itself  in  grateful  adoration  before  the  Living 
Godr  the  God  of  Israel,  the  only  Lord  and  God  of 
the  whole  earth." 

The  Rev.  Bishop  Simpson  preached  a  sermon 
lately  in  this  city,  wherein  speaking  of  the 
conquests  of  Christianity  as  proof  of  its  truth, 
he  eloquently  referred  to  the  breaking  down  of  all 
the  pagan  religions  prevailing  in  Greece  and  Rome, 
a  favorite  and  standard  argument  with  the  church- 
men. But  hear  what  says  the  Rev.  Mr.  Voysey 
on  this  subject. 

"But  we  shall  miss  the  whole  force  of  this 
argument,  from  the  fact  of  the  spread  of  Chris- 
tianity among  the  Greeks,  Romans,  and  Egyptians, 
if  we  do  not  notice  also  by  whom,  and  by  what 


[23] 

manner  of  people  Christianity  was  rejected. 
There  was  one  section  at  least  of  the  Roman 
Empire  that  steadfastly  refused  to  accept  Chris- 
tianity whom  no  bribes,  no  threats,  nor  the  bitterest 
penalties  and  persecutions,  could  ever  compel  to 
profess  the  Christian  faith.  A  people  historically 
often  unfaithful,  changeable,  prone  to  wander, 
nevertheless  immovable  as  the  everlasting  hills  to 
all  apostolic  inducements  to  idolatry.  This  people 
actually  gave  heed  for  a  time  to  its  founder  and 
his  immediate  followers,  and  suffered  even  in 
Jerusalem  the  establishment  of  a  Christian  bishop; 
but  the  moment  they  saw  what  Christianity  really 
was,  and  what  it  involved,  they  shook  it  off  from 
them  like  a  leprous  garment,  and  from  that  day 
forth  would  not  for  very  love  of  God  allow 
themselves  to  be  perverted  by  its  claims.  If  you 
look  for  a  marvel  in  connection  with  Christianity, 
it  is  to  be  seen  in  its  pitiable  weakness  in  its 
fiercest  encounters  with  Judaism.  If  persistence 
under  "the  most  frightful  disadvantages  be  any 
token  of  Divine  favor,  or  supernatural  aid,  these 
are  to  be  seen  in  all  their  brilliancy,  not  in  the 
history  of  Christian  triumph  over  a  pagan  world, 
but  in  the  unbroken  line  of  Jewish  fidelity, 
by  which  they  have  to  this  day  defeated  the 
assaults  of  Christianity." 

How  the  light  is  spreading  when  we  hear  such 
enunciations  as  these  proceeding  from  the  pulpit 
of  a  dissenting  church  in  protestant  England. 
Do  you  recall  my  friends  the  prophecy  of  Jeremiah 
(Ch.  16  v.  19)  "Oh  Lord,  my  strength  and  my 
fortress,  my  refuge  in  the  day  of  trouble  ;  Unto 
thee  shall  the  gentiles  come  ff  om  the  ends  of  the 
earth,  and  they  shall  say;  verily  our  fathers  have 
inherited  falsehood,  vanity,  things  in  which  there 
is  no  profit." 


[24] 

And  would  you  learn  my  friends  the  effect  of 
these  preachings  on  the  English  mind.  Let  me 
read  you  an  extract  from  a  letter  writen  by  a  non- 
Jew,  by  one  who  calls  himself  a  member  of  the 
church  of  England,  although  not  a  believer  in  the 
dogmatic  Christianity.  "I  know  too,  writes  he, 
to  an  English  paper,  that  at  least  one  large 
and  liberal  section  of  the  Church  is  making 
a  steady  development  towards  Mr.  Voysey's 
advanced  position,  which  it  is  certain  eventually 
to  reach.  His  printed  sermons  are  read  every 
week  by  thoughtful  clergymen  in  different  parts 
of  the  country,  some  of  whom  have  been  thereby 
induced  to  modify  their  own  teaching,  and  greatly 
to  the  public  advantage.  Instead  of  defending 
any  longer  the  supernatural  claims  of  Christianity, 
which  they  know  to  be  utterly  indefensible,  and 
afflicting  their  congregations  week  after  week  with 
tedious  discourses  on  the  Trinity,  the  Atonement, 
and  justification  by  faith,  they  direct  themselves 
as  a  good  journalist  would  do,  to  exposing  the 
worst  diseases  of  modern  society,  and  to  pointing 
out  the  special  requirements  of  our  times." 
I  am  not  wrong  then,  I  think,  in  speaking  of 
the  concessions  of  Christianity  to  Judaism.  Aye, 
we  see  lines  divergent  from  the  old  Catholicism 
which  have  gone  beyond  Judaism  in  their  dissent, 
and  represent  that  rationalism  and  Deism  so 
prevalent  in  the  present  day.  Our  age  is  an  age 
of  skepticism  and  inquiry.  Intelligent  man  no 
longer  accepts  his  religion  on  the  ipse  dixit  of  the 
priest.  Intelligent  man  demands,  and  searches 
for  a  religion  which  shall  appeal  to,  and  be 
accepted  by  his  intellect  as  •  well  as  by  his 
emotions.  One  that  shall  satisfy  his  reason  as  well 
as  his  heart.  One*  that  shall  feed  his  whole  nature, 


[25] 

and  not  unnaturally  develop  one  part,  and  dwarf 
and  stunt  the  other.  What  Professor  Blaikie 
says  in  his  late  work  on  the  Natural  History  of 
Atheism,  may  well  apply  to  other  faiths  than 
Buddhism.  "So  long,  indeed,"  writes  he,  "as 
thought  is  suppressed  and  education  neglected, 
such  a  religion  may  continue  to  satisfy  the  masses, 
and  dominate  the  popular  sentiment  without 
serious  question ;  but  the  moment  a  cultivated 
reason  is  stirred  to  the  exercise  of  its  legitimate 
functions,  such  a  religion  droops.  The  nobility 
of  its  moral  inspiration  is  forgotten  in  the  absurd- 
ity of  its  intellectual  assertions,  for  a  man  will  not 
envy  the  position  of  moral  saintship  in  a  system, 
'  where  to  be  an  orthodox  believer  implies  that  he 
is  intellectually  an  ass." 

The  rationalistic  spirit  which  is  abroad  attacks 
not  Christianity  alone.  Judaism  too  has  to  meet 
it ;  aird  it  must  be  met,  my  friends,  fairly  and 
squarely  in  honorable  combat.  We  cannot  better 
our  cause  if  a  bad  one,  by  refusing  to  recognize  the 
presence  of  the  enemy,  if  enemy  indeed  it  be,  for  a 
man  may  wrestle  with  one  who  is  not  an  enemy. 
We  must  meet  and  repel,  or  failing  to  repel,  or  only 
partially  conquering,  must  accept  our  defeat  or 
our  partial  defeat,  as  our  ancestor  Jacob  in  his 
wrestling  with  the  angel,  by  exacting  a  blessing 
from  the  minister  of  light  with  whom  we  have 
contended. 

In  the  light  of  the  demands  of  the  intelligence 
of  the  age  then,  let  us  ask  what  is  Judaism?  Is 
it  that  religion  of  mere  ceremonial  that  some  have 
painted  it?  Is  it  that  unspiritual  regard  of  mere 
precept  that  some  have  considered  it,  that  mere 
carnal  observance  that  the  church  has  represented 
it?  Does  it  really  possess  those  exclusive  features 


[26] 

that  are  so  after  imputed  to  it?  Is  it  true  that  it 
is  a  mere  tribal  religion  teaching  a  difference  of 
principle  towards  the  Jew  and  the  gentile?  Are 
its  conceptions  of  Deity  so  anthopomorphic  and 
irrational  as  some  of  the  new  schools  of  rationalism 
have  stated  tnem?  Or  is  it,  or  does  it  contain  the 
elements  and  principles  of  that  rational  religion 
for  which  the  awakening  world  is  craving,  that 
universal  religion  which  will  eventually  embrace 
within  its  fold  all  mankind?  Let  us  dispassion- 
ately examine.  It  may  be  somewhat  difficult  to 
convince  those  who  are  so  prejudiced  against 
Judaism  that  they  are  not  accessible  by  reason  ; 
but  it  may  at  all  events  satisfy  ourselves  to  see 
our  loved,,  ancient,  and  glorious  faith  in  its  true 
light. 

First,  then,  as  to  its  exclusiveness,  one  of 
the  favorite  and  hackneyed  charges  against  it. 
Exclusiveness  is  supposed  to  mean  debarring 
from  participation.  It  does  not  mean  refusal  to 
blend  with,  to  amalgamate  with,  or  to  associate 
intimately  with.  Surrounded  as  the  Jews  were 
by  idolatrous  nations,  and  with  the  tendency  dis- 
played by  the  nation  to  relapse  into  the  idolatrous 
practices  of  Egypt,  or  to  adopt  those  of  the 
surrounding  countries,  they  might  well  refrain 
from  association  with,  or  amalgamation  with 
them,  but  were  they  exclusive?  Did  they  deny  the 
right  of  citizenship  or  naturalization  to  strangers? 
They  certainly  did  not  send  out  emigration  agen- 
cies to  surrounding  nations,  to  induce  them  to 
come  and  settle  in  a  country  limited  in  extent  as 
was  Palestine,  and  the  land  of  which  was  already 
entirely  divided  among  the  inhabitants  ;  but  there 
was  no  exclusion  of  the  stranger  from  partici- 
pation in  all  their  privileges.  What  said  the 


[27] 

Jewish  law  on  this  subject?  Referring  to  the 
feast  of  Passover,  the  most  national  of  all  the 
feasts  ;  the  one  celebrating  the  redemption  from 
Egyptian  slavery,  the  anniversary  of  national  free- 
dom that  would  seem  peculiar  to  the  native  born, 
we  find  it  written,  that  when  a  stranger  should 
sojourn  in  the  land  and  would  prepare  the  Pass- 
over unto  the  Lord,  in  other  words,  become 
throughly  identified  with  Israel,  he  might  be  re- 
ceived into  the  covenant  and  come  near  and 
prepare  it,  and  be  as  one  that  is  born  in  the  land. 
"One  law  shall  be  to  him  that  is  home-bornand 
unto  the  stranger  that  sojourneth  among  you." 
(Ex.  Oh.  12,  v.  47-49.) 

What  is  the  teaching  of  the  prophets  on  the 
subject.  Turn  we  to  Isaiah  Ch.  54,  v.  3,  and  we 
find,  "And  let  not  say  the  son  of  the  stranger  who 
hath  joined  himself  unto  the  Lord,  Surely  the 
Lord  will  separate  me  from  his  people;  nor,  let 
the  eunuch  say  Behold  I  am  a  dry  tree.  For 
thus  saith  the  Lord,  unto  the  eunuchs  that  keep 
my  Sabbaths,  and  take  hold  of  my  covenant. 

"Even  unto  them  will  I  give  in  my  house,  and 
within  my  walls  a  place' and  a  name  better  than  of 
sons  and  daughters,  I  will  give  them  an  everlasting 
name  that  shall  not  be  cut  off. 

"  Also  the  sons  of  the  stranger  that  join  them- 
selves unto  the  Lord,  to  serve  Him,  and  to  love 
the  name  of  the  Lord,  to  be  His  servants,  every 
one  that  keepeth  the  Sabbath  from  polluting  it, 
and  taketh  hold  of  my  covenant. 

"  Even  them  will  I  bring  to  my  holy  mountain, 
and  make  them  joyful  in  my  house  of  prayer, 
their  burnt  offerings,  and  their  sacrifices  shall  be 
accepted  upon  my  altar,  for  my  house  shall  be 
called  a  house  of  prayer  for  all  people. 


[28] 

"  The  Lord  God  who  gathereth  the  outcasts  of 
Israel  saith ;  yet  will  I  gather  others  to  him 
besides  his  own  gathered  outcasts." 

Does  that  sound  like  exclusiyeness?  But  let  us 
look  further.  In  Ezekiel  Ch/47,  I  find  when  he 
is  speaking  of  the  future  division  of  the  land  at 
the  promised  restoration,  as  follows  : 

"And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that  ye  shall  divide 
it.  by  lot  as  an  inheritance  unto  you.  and  to  the 
strangers  that  sojourn  among  you.  which  shall 
beget  children  among  you :  and  they  shall  be 
unto  you  as  born  in  the  country  among  the  children 
of  Israel,  they  shall  have  inheritance  with  you 
among  the  tribes  of  Israel. 

"And  it  shall  come  to  pass  in  what  tribe  the 
stranger  sojourneth,  there  shall  ye  give  him  his 
inheritance,  saith  the  Lord  God." 

This  is  the  exclusiveness  of  the  Bible.  Have 
our  sages  been  more  exclusive?  Is  proselytism 
forbidden?  No.  Encouraged  it  certainly  is  not; 
first,  because  there  was  no  exclusive  salvation 
claimed  by  Judaism  as  is  done  by  Christianity. 
Judaism  the  exclusive  has  no  Athanasiari  creed 
with  a  damnatory  clause  for  all  who  do  not  accept 
it.  The  righteous  of  all  nations,  say  our  sages, 
-have  a  portion  in  the  world  to  come."  All  that 
is  required  of  them  is  to  renounce  idolatry,  which, 
according  to  Jewish  definition,  is  the  ascription  of 
Divine  honors',  or  rendering  worship  to  any  one 
but  God  alone  ;  to  worship  Him  alone,  and  to 
follow  the  broad  eternal  principles  of  justice  and 
right  as  revealed  to  man.  The  ceremonial  law 
was  not  considered  binding  on  them  any  more 
than  the  laws  peculiar  to  the  priest  and  Levite 
were  binding  on  the  general  body  of  the  Jewish 
nation.  What  need  then  of  proselytizing?  Judaism 


[29] 

has  no  need  to  purchase  testimony  of  its  truth  to 
parade  before  its  votaries  to  strengthen  their  faith, 
as  would  seem  to  be  done  by  some  of  the  so  called 
conversion  societies  of  the  rival  faith.     Judaism 
has  the  common  sense  to  realize  that  you  cannot 
force  a  man's  eye  to  receive  more  light  than  it  is 
prepared  for.     It  waits  with  a  calm  and  confident 
patience  for  the  gradual  dissipation  of  the  clouds 
of  error  before  the  sun  of  intelligence  and  general 
education,  and  contents  itself  with  its  protest  and 
its  example.'    It  realizes  that  you  cannot  convince 
a  man  who  professes  to  have  no  reason ;  that  you 
must  wait  patiently  till  the  faculty  develops,  and 
then    he  will    himself   discover  his    error.     It  is 
useless  to  attempt  to  make  a  blind  man  under- 
stand that  green  is  green,  or  yellow  not  red,  if  he 
professes  to  be  governed  by  faith,  and  has  a  faith 
or  belief  in  the  contrary.     You  can  only  seek^  to 
restore  the  sense  which  will  disclose  it  to  him. 
Hence  it  is  that  Judaism  is  not   a   proselytizing 
faith.     But  it  refuses  not  communion  to  those  who 
awakening  to  the  light  would  accept  its  teachings 
in  whole  or  in  part.     There  were  in  olden  times 
in   Israel    two    classes    of  proselytes,  those   who 
entered  into  the  fold  and  became  to  all  intents 
and  purposes  Jews  ;  these  were  the  proselytes  of 
justice    so  called  ;    the  others    who  not   entering 
into  the  covenant  yet    had    abandoned    idolatry, 
worshipped  the  one  true  God,  and  followed  the 
general  moral  teachings  of  the  Jewish  law.    With 
both  there  was  amalgamation  and  intermarriage, 
the  children  of  the  latter  being  also  recognized, 
and  brought  up  as  Jews.     After  the  dispersion, 
however,  the  latter  order  seems  to  have  been  no 
longer  recognized  ;   probably  from  the   tendency 
that  would  exist  towards  estrangement  from  the 


[30] 

ancestral  religion  through  the  dominating  influ- 
ence of  the  mass  among  whom  the  small  minority 
was  scattered. 

Exclusiveness  then  we  see  there  is  not  in 
Judaism  ;  that  is  exclusiveness  in  its  true  sense. 
If  it  is  exclusiveness  for  the  minority  to  refuse 
to  amalgamate,  and  intermarry  with  a  majority 
that  they  must  regard  and  esteem  from  their 
point  of  view  as  idolatrous,  then  certainly  must 
the  Jew  be  called  exclusive.  But  it  is  the  ex- 
clusiveness of  self  preservation,  of  national  life. 
It  is  the  exclusiveness  of  the  serried  squares  of 
Wellington  at  Waterloo,  to  break  which  would  be 
ruin,  defeat,  and  destruction.  Would  one  enter 
to  join  us  in  the  battle  and  strife  for  truth?  our 
ranks  are  open  to  him.  Is  he  for  our  enemies? 
the  unbroken  front  is  maintained.  For  how  long 
think  you,  my  friends,  it  would  require  if  a  differ- 
ent course  were  pursued,  if  this  rigid  refusal  to 
amalgamate  were  not  persisted  in,  for  Israel  to 
lose  itself  and  be  absorbed  among  the  nations? 
I  have  not  time  to  pursue  the  subject,  but  let  your 
imagination  picture  the  home  training  of  children 
in  a  house  where  a  mother  alien  in  religion  to 
that  of  the  Jewish  father  controlled  the  religious 
education  of  the  child,  or  in  the  absence  of  the 
father  toiling  for  the  family  subsistence,  surrend- 
ered the  tender  mind  of  the  child  to  be  moulded 
and  impressed  by  her  priest  or  religious  adviser  ; 
he  becoming  the  true  spiritual  father  of  the  child, 
and  there  existing  thus  a  species  of  spiritual 
adultery  too  sadly  prevalent  in  the  world,  at  which 
the  refined  and  sensitive  mind  revolts.  Imagine 
the  condition  of  the  Jewish  mother  allied  to  one 
different  to  her  in  faith,  meeting  alone  the  bitter 
prejudices  against  her  faith,  and  the  secret  in- 


[31] 

fluences  with  which  she  would  be  beset ;  and  al- 
though she  succeeded  in  preserving  her  own  faith 
and  belief  amid  these  untoward  influences,  seeing 
perhaps  her  loved,  and  cherished  little  ones  influ- 
enced and  led  into  what  she  must  believe  if  a 
consistent  Jewess  to  be  idolatry ;  and  then 
advocate  amalgamation,  and  a  breaking  down  of 
those  barriers,  that  have  been  wisely  set  to 
preserve  intact  our  faith,  and  our  nationality. 

The  next  charge  that  we  have  to  consider,  is 
that  of  Judaism  recognizing  a  difference  between 
the  treatment  of  the  stranger  and  the  native  born. 
As  utterly  false,  baseless,  and  preposterous  a  charge 
as  could  possibly  be  invented.  I  say  preposterous, 
because  the  Jewish  law  and  sacred  writings  are  so 
full  of  a  doctrine  entirely  the  reverse  of  this;  the 
care,  protection,  and  love  of  the  stranger  is  made 
so  prominent  a  principle,  that  it  is  perhaps  one  of 
the  most  noticeable  features  of  Judaism.  I  have 
referred  already  to  some  of  the  texts  that  prove 
no  exclusion  of  the  stranger.  I  need  only  cite  a 
few  more  to  show  how  wicked  a  fabrication  is  this 
charge,  and  to  convince  any  one  that  the  condition 
of  the  stranger  in  Israel  was  certainly  no  worse, 
but  was  even  better  than  that  of  the  native  born. 

We  find  him  committed  to  our  charity  and  care 
even  as  the  widow  and  orphan,  and  surely  they 
are  cared  for  in  Israel.  There  is  not  a  text, 
I  think,  that  refers  to  the  orphan  and  widow  but 
the  stranger  is  included.  I  can  recall  one  where 
the  widow  is  omitted,  but  never  the  stranger. 
When  the  Jewish  prophets  denounce  the  crimes 
of  which  the  nation  had  been  guilty,  to  provoke 
the  wrath  and  punishment  of  God,  prominent 
among  them  is  the  perpetration  of  wrong  to  the 


[32] 

stranger.     But  I  will  merely  read  the  texts  and 
let  them  refute  the  charge. 

In  Lev.  Ch.  19  v.  33-34  we  have  "and  if  a  stran- 
ger sojourn  with  you  in  your  land,  ye  shall  not 
vex  him.  But  the  stranger  that  dwelleth  with 
you  shall  be  unto  you  as  one  born  among  you, 
and  thou  shall  love  him  as  thyself ;  for  ye  were 
strangers  in  the  land  of  Egypt." 

In  Deut.  Ch.  10  v.  18-19.  "He,  the  Lord  doth 
execute  the  judgment  of  the  fatherless  and  widow, 
and  loveth  the  stranger,  in  giving  him  food  and 
ruiment.  Love  ye  therefore  the  stranger  for  ye 
were  strangers  in  the  land  of  Egypt." 

Again  Deut.  Ch.  14  v.  28-29.  "At  the  end  of 
three  years  thou  shall  bring  forth  all  the  tithe  of 
thine  increase  the  same  year  and  lay  it  up  within 
thy  gates.  And  the  Levite  (because  he  hath  no 
part  nor  inheritance  with  thee)  and  the  stranger 
—the  stranger  first  mark  you — and  the  fatherless, 
and  the  widow  which  are  within  thy  gates,  shall 
come  and  eat  and  be  satisfied." 

Again  it  is  written  (Deut.  Ch.  24  v.  17-21.) 
"Thou  shall  not  pervert  the  judgment  of  the 
stranger,  nor  of  the  fatherless,  nor  take  the  rai- 
ment of  the  widow  to  pledge.  When  thou  cuttest 
down  thy  harvest  in  thy  field,  and  hast  forgot  a 
sheaf  in  the  field,  thou  shalt  not  go  again  to 
fetch  it;  it  shall  be  for  the  stranger— the  stranger 
always  first — for  the  fatherless,  and  the  widow. 
When  thou  beatest  thy  olive  tree,  thou  shalt  not 
go  over  the  boughs  again,  it  shall  be  for  the 
stranger,  the  fatherless,  and  the  widow. 

"When  thou  gatherest  the  grapes  of  thy  vine- 
yard, thou  shalt  not  glean  it  afterward,  it  shall 
be  for  the  stranger,  the  fatherless,  and  the 
widow." 


[33] 

;<And  in  Lev.  Ch.  23,  we  have,  "And  if  thy 
brother  become  poor  and  fall  in  decay  with  thee, 
then  shalt  thou  assist  him,  yea  a  stranger,  or 
sojourner  that  he  may  live  with  thee.  Thou 
shall  not  take  of  him  any  usury  or  increase,  but 
thou  shalt  be  afraid  of  thy  God. 

''And  when  ye  reap  the  harvest  of  your  land, 
thou  shalt  not  cut  away  the  corners  of  thy  field 
when  thou  reapest ;  neither  shalt  thou  gather  any 
gleanings  of  thy  harvest,  unto  the  poor  and  the 
stranger  shalt  thou  leave  them,  I  am  the  Lord." 

In  Exodus  Ch.  22  v.  Ch.  23.  we  find,  "And  a 
stranger  thou  shalt  not  vex,  and  shalt  not  oppress 
him.  for  ye  were  strangers  in  the  land  of  Egypt." 
When  the  basket  of  the  first  fruits  is  brought 
as  an  offering  as  commanded  in  Deut,  Ch.  26,  the 
injunction  is  li  And  thou  shalt  rejoice  with  every 
good  thing  which  the  Lord  thy  God  hath  given 
thee,  a«d  unto  thy  house,  thou  and  the  Levite  and 
the  stranger  that  is  in  the  midst  of  thee." 

Among  the  curses  denounced  on  Mt.  Ebal, 
Deut.  Ch.  27  v.  19,  there  is,  "  Cursed  be  he  that 
perverteth  the  judgment  of  the  stranger,  the 
fatherless  or  the  widow." 

When  the  prophet  Ezekiel  shews  the  abom- 
inations of  the  "bloody  city"  that  is  to  bring 
about  the  scattering  and  dispersion  among  the 
nations,  he  says  (Ez.  Ch.  22  v.  7  )  "  In  thee 
have  they  set  light  by  father  and  mother,  in  the 
midst  of  thee  have  they  dealt  by  oppression  with 
the  stranger — again  first — in  thee  have  they 
vexed  the  fatherless  and  the  widow."  And  the 
prophet  Malachi  denouncing  the  punishment 
of  God  against  the  wicked  exclaims  :  "And 
[  (the  Lord)  will  come  near  unto  you  to  judg- 
ment, and  I  will  be  a  swift  witness  against 


[34] 

the  sorcerers,  and  against  the  adulterers,  and 
against  the  false  swearers,  and  against  those  that 
oppress  the  hireling  in  his  wages,  the  widow  and 
the  fatherless,  and  that  turn  aside  the  stranger 
from  his  right,  and  fear  not  me,  saith  the  Lord  !" 

And  when  Israel's  King  is  dedicating  the  house 
of  G-od,  the  national  Temple,  does  he  exclude  or 
forget  the  stranger?  No  !  But  in  that  grand 
dedicatory  prayer  he  exclaims,  "  Moreover  con- 
cerning a  stranger  that  is  not  of  thy  people  Israel, 
but  cometh  out  of  a  far  country  for  thy  namesake. 
Hear  thou  in  heaven  thy  dwelling  place,  and  do 
according  to  all  that  the  stranger  calleth  to  Thee 
for,  that  all  people  of  the  earth  may  know  Thy 
name,  to  fear  Thee,  as  do  Thy  people  Israel,  and 
that  they  may  know  that  this  house,  which  I 
have  builded  is  called  by  this  name."  Have  I 
adduced  enough  my  friends  to  shew  the  tribalism 
of  Judaism?  to  shew  how  much  it  recognizes  a 
difference  of  treatment  between  the  Hebrew  and 
the  stranger  ?  If  all  the  teachings  of  the  'church 
supposed  to  be  supported  by  the  scripture  are 
as  true  as  this  misrepresentation  of  the  Church- 
man, it  might  well  have  sealed  the  book  to  its 
followers. 

There  is  one  point  perhaps  on  which  I  might 
say  a  few  words  more,  and  that  is  that  popular 
misconception  concerning  the  permission  to  take 
usury  from  the  stranger.  A  misconception  which 
arises  from  a  mistranslation  of  a  versa  in  Dent. 
Ch.  23,  v.  20,  thus  rendered  in  the  English 
version  "Unto  a  stranger  thou  mayest  lend  upon 
usury,  but  unto  thy  brother  thou  shalt  not  lend 
upon  usury."  There  would  appear  to  be  an  entire 
mistranslation  of  this  verse  as  well  as  the  pre- 
ceeding  one,  "thou  shalt  not  lend  upon  usury  to 


[35] 

thy  brother,  usury  of  money,  usury  of  victuals, 
usury  of  anything  that'is  lent  upon  usury."  The 
word  usury  meaning  only  interest,  or  the  price 
paid  for  the  use  of  money,  as  it  once  did,  was  cor- 
rect enough  perhaps  formerly,  but  now  that  the 
word  has  come  to  mean  illegal,  excessive,  or  ex- 
orbitant interest,  it  is  no  longer  so.  Again,  the 
Hebrew  words  rendered,  "thou  shalt  not  take  in- 
terest, and  thou  mayest  take  interest,"  correctly 
translated  would  be  "Thou  shalt  not  cause  inter- 
est to  be  taken,  and  thou  mayest  cause  interest 
to  be  taken"  the  verb  being  in  what  is  called  the 
hiphil,  or  causative  form.  In  other  words  pro- 
hibiting either  the  receiving  interest,  or  paying 
interest  to  thy  brother.  And  as  the  stranger 
sojourning  in  the  land  was  expressly  placed  in  the 
same  position  as  the  native  born,  as  we  have  seen 
by  the  texts  quoted  from  Lev.  Ch.  19,  and  Lev. 
Ch.  25:  the  taking  or  paying  interest  was  pro- 
hibited entirely  in  the  land ;  the  object  doubtless 
being  to  prevent  the  accumulation  of  wealth  in 
the  hands  of  the  few.  The  word  stranger  as  the 
translation  of  nr:  (Nachree)  certainly  seems 
incorrect.  In  nearly  all  the  quotations  made  by 
me  to-night  in  which  the  word  stranger  occurs, 
the  word  in  the  Hebrew  is  13  (Gare).  The  word 
13  is  almost  always,  I  think  always  used  in  refer- 
ence to  the  foreigner  residing  in  the  land,  -nr: 
(Nachree)  really  means  foreigner.  We  have  the 
word  used  certainly  in  this  sense  in  the  instance 
of  Solomon's  prayer,  where  he  speaks  of  the  nrj 
or  foreigner  coming  from  a  far  off  country. 
1  Kings,  Ch.  11,  v.  1.  We  have  used  it  in 
this  sense  when  Isaiah  says  "and  the  sons  of 
the  stranger  shall  build  up  thy  walls  and  their 
Kings  shall  minister  unto  thee."  (Is.  Ch.  60, 
v.  10) ;  also  in  David's  song,  II  Sam.  Ch.  22,  v.  45, 


[36] 

when  he  says  the  '  sons  of  the  stranger  or 
foreigner  shall  submit  themselves  unto  me.'  And 
in  many  other  instances.  The  proper  construc- 
tion of  the  verse  then  is  that  interest  was- 
prohibited  entirely  in  the  land,  but  loans  to  or 
from  a  foreigner  residing  out  of  the  land  might 
bear  interest.  After  the  dispersion  when  the  Jew 
became  the  stranger  and  sojourner  in  the  various 
countries,  the  law  was  modified  by  the  Rabbinical 
authorities  to  suit  the  circumstances,  and  legal 
interest  was  permitted  to  be  taken  from  the  non 
Jew.  What  the  rates  of  interest  were  in  the 
middle  ages,  as  charged  by  the  Jews,  who  were 
of  necessity  from  being  debarred  all  other  pur- 
suits the  banking  class,  I  can  not  state,  but  they 
would  hardly  equal  what  we  have  seen  current, 
and  most  of  us  have  paid  in  this  city  upon  the 
choicest  security,  or  what  is  commonly  paid  .on 
bottomry.  We  realize  now-a-days  both  in  inter- 
est and  insurance  that  the  risk  makes  the  rate,  but 
that  commercial  principle  was  not  understood  in 
the  dark  ages,  except  by  the  Jews  who  were 
the  commercial  and  banking  class.  But  outside 
of  this  commercial  principle,  the  monetary  trans- 
actions of  the  middle  ages  seem  to  have  resolved 
themselves  in  a  pecuniary  war  of  reprisals.  It  was 
confiscation,  robbery,  and  despoiling  of  the  prin- 
cipal on  the  part  of  the  Christian,  and  an  attempt 
to  get  even  through  high  interest  on  the  part  of 
the  persecuted  and  despoiled  Jew.  If  an  account 
could  be  taken  of  these  transactions,  there  would 
be  found,  I  think,  a  large  balance  to  the  credit  of 
the  Jew,  who  certainly  did  not  find  among  the 
Christian  nations  that  care,  love,  and  protection 
that  was  taught  to  him, by  his  law  to  be  shown  to 
the  stranger.  Was  that  too  among  the  beggarly 
elements  of  the  law  of  which  Paul  speaks  ? 


[37] 

I  have  DOW  to  refer  to  the  charge  of  anthro- 
pomorphism   in    the    conceptions    of   Deity    by 
Judaism,  an  objection  urged  by  the  rationalistic 
mind,    and    finding  its    support  in    the    language 
used  in  the  Jewish  sacred  writings  in  reference  to 
the  Supreme  Being.     But  long  before  the  dawn  of 
rationalism  as  a  phase  of  religious  thought,  that 
subject  had  been  discussed  and  disposed  of  within 
Judaism    itself.       That    mode    of    thought   and 
speech  which  we  find  peculiar  to  mankind  in  the 
early  stages  of  society,  and  well  adapted  to  convey 
vivid  impressions  to  the  uneducated,  and  unphilo- 
sophical  mind,  was  recognized  in  Judaism   as  a 
mere  figure  of  speech,  just  as  we  now  speak  of  the 
rising  and  setting  of  the  sun  and  moon.     It  could 
convey    no    anthropomorphic  idea  to  th,e  Jewish 
mind,   for  that  was  thoroughly  imbued  with  the 
teaching  of  the  law  that  no  human  conceptions 
could  be  formed  of  Deity.      "Take  you  therefore 
good  Keed,  it  said,  for  ye  saw  no  manner  of  simili- 
tude on 'the  day  that  the  Lord  spoke  unto  you  in 
Horeb  out  of  the  midst  of  the  fire,    (Dent."  Oh.  4 
14).     Thou   shalt  not  make  unto  thyself  any 
likeness  of  anything  that  is  the  heaven  above,  or 
in  the  earth  beneath,  or  that  is  in  the  water  under 
the  earth."      (Ex.  Ch.  20.) 

It  was  the  teaching  of  Judaism  to  correct  any 
misapprehension  on  this  point,  that  the  Scripture 
spoke  in  the  language  of  men,  and  that  all  these 
expressions  in  reference  to  the  appearance  of  God, 
to  His  anger  being  awakened,  to  His  hand,  His 
eye,  the  shadow  of  His  wing  and  the  like  anthro- 
pomorphic expressions  are  all  merely  figurative. 
The  Jewish  creed  which  is  the  true  criterion  of  the 
Jewish  belief  is  clear  enough  on  this  subject.  It 
leaves  nothing  open  to  doubt,  It  contains  as 

304796 


[38] 

purely  philosophical  an  idea  of  Deity  as  can  possi- 
bly be  conceived  ;  as  rational  as  the  most  rational- 
istic mind  could  desire.  A  singular,  beautiful,  and 
striking  feature  in  it  is  that  it  descends  not  to 
any  explanation,  or  proof  of  His  existence.  It 
assumes  it  as  one  of  those  self-evident  propo- 
sitions that  the  mind  naturally  accepts,  as  if  it 
an  emanation  from  Deity  was  instinctively  con- 
scious of  its  derivation,  and  reflected  although 
in  the  most  infinitesimal  degree  its  original. 

"  Extolled  and  praised  be  the  Living  God," 
is  the  sublime  opening.  He  exists,  but  his  exist- 
ence is  not  bounded  by  lime." 

"He  is  One,  but  His  unity  is  unparallelled. 
He  is  incomprehensible  and  His  unity  is  endless. 

"  He  has  no  material  form,  He  is  incorporeal 
and  His  holiness  is  not.  comparable  to  aught. 

"He  existed  prior  to  all  creation,  He  is  the 
first,  but  without  any  period  of  commencement." 

Is  there  anything  anthropomorphic  here,  aught 
but  the  most  rational  and  philosophical  idea  of 
the  Supreme  First  Cause?  It  is  one  that  can 
satisfy  the  mind  of  a  philosopher,  and  be  accepted 
by  the  intelligence  of  a  child. 

And  turning  from  the  creed  to  the  sacred 
writings,  we  find  the  representation  of  that 
supremely  Holy,  all  powerful,  incomprehensible 
One,  as  the  tender,  loving,  and  merciful  Father, 
who  compassionateth  his  children,  who  is  all 
merciful  and  gracious,  who  forgiveth  iniquity 
and  sin  to  the  penitent,  but  who  will  by  no  means 
clear  the  guilty  and  impenitent  ;  who  hath  no 
pleasure  in  the  death  of  the  wicked,  but  that  he 
repent  and  live  ;  who  careth  for  the  widow,  the 
fatherless  and  the  stranger  ;  who  exalteth  the 
humble  and  casteth  down  the  proud  ;  who  is 


[39] 

accessible  to  prayer  ;  with  whom  the  human  heart 
can  commune  through  our  emotional  nature  ;  the 
sole  object  of  our  worship,  and  the  highest  of  our 
love  and  gratitude;  the  balm  of  our  sorrows:  the 
fountain  of  our  joys.  Conceptions  that  to  a  great 
extent  clash  with  the  rationalistic  views  of  the 
present  day,  and  which  in  the  future  will  be  either 
modified  by,  or  as  I  think  modify  that  cold  ration- 
alism and  Deism  which  is  now  so  generally  pre- 
valent in  the  world  as  the  natural  reaction  from 
dogmatic  Christianity,  and  with  which  Judaism  is 
now  wrestling  in  close  conflict. 


And  now  as  to  the  ceremonialism,  and  supposed 
want  of  spirituality  of  Judaism;  two  favorite  charges 
often  Brought  against  it,  and  made  the  pretext  for 
the  alleged  necessity  for  Christianity,  which  is 
imagined  by  its  followers  to  be  a  purely  spiritual 
religion,  dispensing  entirely  with  observance. 

It  is  however  a  somewhat  singular  fact  that  the 
supposed  founder  of  Christianity — I  refer  to  Jesus 
not  to  Paul,  who  was,  indeed,  if  the  gospel  account 
of  him  be  true,  the  real  founder  of  Christianity,  a 
religion  of  which  Jesus  never  dreamed, — is  no 
where  represented  as  dispensing  with  any  of  the 
observances  of  the  law.  It  is  Paul  who  is  made 
to  speak  of  the  beggarly  elements  of  the  law ; 
who  says  that  the  law  worketh  wrath,  and  without 
the  law  sin  were  dead  ;  and  who  abolishes  it,  and 
sets  up  faith  in  its  stead. 

Like  many  of  the  prophets  and  sages  of  Israel, 
who  lived  before  his  time.  Jesus  denounced  the 
exaltation  of  the  letter  over  the  spirit,  the  practice 


[40] 

of  the  ceremonial  and  the  mere  precept,  regardless 
of  the  spirit  which  should  fill  and  animate  them  ; 
but  we  have  no  abolition  of  any  law,  ceremonial 
or  moral.  A  hygienic  law  under  the  guise  of  a 
ceremonial  one,  is  certainly  apparently  disregarded 
in  the  saying  attributed  to  him  in  reference  to 
eating  with  unwashed  hands;  that,  "that  which 
goeth  into  a  man's  mouth  defileth  him  not,  but 
what  proceedeth  out  of  it  defileth  a  man ;"  which, 
if  intended  to  teach  the  lesson,  as  it  doubtless 
only  is.  that  more  care  is  to  be  given,  and  more 
importance  attached  to  the  evil  that  proceedeth 
from  a  man's  mouth,xthan  the  avoidance  of  eating 
with  unwashed  hands,  is  certainly  sound  and  good 
doctrine  ;  but  if  intended  to  be  understood,  au 
pied  de  la  lettre,  is  very  unsound  hygienic  teaching 
(especially  before  the  invention  of  forks,)  and  may 
be  a  great  offence  against  decency,  both  which 
we  shall  presently  see  are  made  a  part  of  religion 
as  regards  Judaism. 

It  may  be  noted  further  as  a  most  significant 
fact,  that  Christianity  which  started  as  a  purely 
spiritual  religion,  is  to  day  almost  as  much  a 
religion  of  observance  as  Judaism  itself.  There 
are  but  few  observances  among  us  that  have 
not  their  equivalent  in  the  Christian  Church. 
Both  have  an  initiatory  rite ;  the  one  circum- 
cision, the  other  baptism.  The  passover  finds 
its  equivalent  in  Easter ;  the  paschal  lamb  in 
the  communion.  The  pentecost  is  made  a  festi- 
val in  both  churches.  The  feast  of  ingather- 
ing, synchronous  with  the  tabernacle  festival,  is 
the  pattern  for  the  thanksgiving  day,  adopted  in 
this  country  at  least  as  a  religious  celebration. 
The  Day  of  Memorial,  and  the  Day  of  Atonement, 
and  the  intervening  days  of  penitence  which  will 


[41] 

complete  the  list  of  our  holy  days,  may  be  par- 
alleled in  Shrove  Tuesday.  Ash  Wednesday,  Lent, 
and  Good  Friday.     The  Sabbath  of  the  decalogue 
abolished   by    an    early    council  of   the    church, 
although   observed   by  Jesus  and    the    primitive 
Christians,  is  supplanted  by  the  human  appoint- 
ment by  Constantine,  that  half  pagan,  half  Chris- 
tian, filiacidal  emperor,  of  the  idolatrous  Roman 
observance  of  the  Suns-day,  which  has  ever  since 
been    observed    by    Christians.      And    we    have 
besides.  Christmas,  and  Palm  Sunday,  and  Pas- 
sion week,  and  Rogation  week,  and  Holy  Thursday, 
or    Ascension    Day,  and    St.  John's   Day,  and  a 
host  of  other  Saint's  Days  besides.    We  may  learn, 
T  think,  from  these  significant  facts,  that  from  the 
very  nature  of  man  which  is  a  dual  one,  material 
as  well  as  spiritual,  there  is  a  necessity  for   an 
appeal  by  religion  to  both  of  these  natures  ;  that 
the  ceremonial  is  intended  to  express  to  a  certain 
extent  the  spiritual ;  to  commemorate  events  which 
awaken    and     inspire    the    religious    sentiment, 
although    not    in    themselves    religion ;    and    to 
symbolize  in  some  concrete  form  appealing  to  our 
senses,    and    bringing   home    more   fully  to    our 
minds    some  grand   truth    or   teaching,  that   we 
might  otherwise  forget  if  only  thought  of  in  the 
abstract.     Let  us  take  for  an  illustration  the  Pass- 
over.     Does    it    seem    a    frivolous,    meaningless 
ceremonial,  the  abstinence  from  leavened  bread, 
and  the  eating  of  unleavened  for  seven  days?     It 
commemorated   by  enacting  the  very  scenes   of 
the   national    exit   from    Egypt— the    liberation 
from  slavery— the  dawn  of  our  freedom.     But  is 
there  not  a  deeper   symbolism  contained  in    it? 
One  that  America,  and  Americans  might  take  to 
heart ;  aye,  and  celebrate  the  Passover  too,  if  the 


[42] 

lesson  it  teaches  could  be  but  graven  on  their 
minds.  The  Passover  was  the  season  of  liberty. 
Leaven  is  the  symbol  of  corruption.  Might  it 
not  be  proclaimed  from  Maine  to  Florida,  from 
Hatteras  to  Mendocino,  that  LIBERTY  AND  CORRUP- 
TION CAN  NEVER  EXIST  TOGETHER? 

But  in  what  does  the  extraordinary  ceremo- 
nialism of  Judaism  consist  now-a-days  ?  I  say 
now-a-days,  because  like  all  other  nations  of 
antiquity,  the  Jews  formerly  had  a  sacrificial 
worship ;  which,  whether  we  regard  Divinely 
ordained  as  the  text  of  the  Pentateuch  might  lead 
us  to  imagine,  or  merely  permitted  as  the  writings 
of  the  prophets  would  seem  to  indicate,  or  whether 
a  mere  human  ordinance  as  the  rational  thought 
of  the  present  day  would  induce  us  to  believe, 
contains  a  much  deeper  meaning  than  is  commonly 
supposed.  You  shall  find  some  minds  shocked  at 
the  idea  of  a  worship,  in  which  the  slaughtering  of 
animals  should  form  a  part.  But  let  us  remember, 
that  the  only  animals  used  in  the  worship  were 
those  generally  employed  for  the  food  of  nian. 
Let  us  remember,  that  in  pastoral  nations  cattle 
were  chiefly  used  as  money,  as  in  agricultural 
ones  the  produce  of  the  earth  was  so  used. 
Homer  speaks  in  the  Iliad  of  the  armor  of 
Diomed  costing  nine  oxen,  and  that  of  Grlaucus 
one  hundred.  The  Latin  word  pecunia  signifying 
money,  is  evidence  that  pecus  cattle  were  originally 
used  by  them  as  money.  Let  us  remember,  that 
three  thousand  years  ago  ministers  and  priests 
were  not  paid  for  their  services  in  current  coin  of 
the  realm,  or  republic.  They  did  not  receive  so 
many  shekels  per  annum,  payable  quarterly  or 
monthly  in  gold  coin,  and  not  in  depreciated 
currency  ;  but  in  those  primitive  times,  they  with 


[43] 

their  families  were  nourished,  and  sustained  by 
their  allotted  share  of  the  food  of  the  people, 
whether  animal  or  vegetable.  And  remembering 
this,  let  me  conduct  one  of  these  shocked  indi- 
viduals to  the  shambles  of  a  great  city,  where  he 
shall  see  thousands  of  God's  creatures  endowed 
with  life,  sensation,  instinct,  and  perhaps  intelli- 
gence, slaughtered,  and  butchered  without  a  word 
of  recognition  of  a  Divine  right,  except  what  may 
be  uttered  by  the  Jewish  killer,  who  carries  even 
there  a  gleam  of  religious  light ;  and  let  me  ask 
him  if  this  is  less  brutalizing,  or  more  elevating 
than  the  animals  being  humanely  killed  by  a 
Divinely  recognized  sanction  ?  the  blood — the  life 
which  God  had  given  them — being  as  it  were 
restored  on  the  altar  to  Him  who  had  given  it,  and 
symbolizing  at  the  same  time  when  needed,  the 
sense  of  guilt  which  a  sinner  might  feel  for  some 
wrong  committed;  and  when  that  was  done,  priest 
and  people  consuming  the  flesh  which  was  their 
food  :  the  priest  and  his  household  also  taking, 
and  enjoying  his  quota  of  the  bread  and  the  wine, 
that  the  law  awarded  to  him  in  lieu  of  his  share 
of  the  land,  which  had  been  divided  among  the 
people  to  his  exclusion.  Let  us  remember,  further, 
that  in  those  days  sacrificial  worship  outside  of 
Palestine  was  not  limited  to  the  sacrifice  of 
animals  used  for  food,  but  often  included  those  of 
human  beings;  and  that  this  terrible  custom  was 
in  vogue  among  those  nations  that  the  Jews  were 
to  supplant.  Let  us  remember  too,  that  for  four 
hundred  years  the  Jewish  p%eople  had  been  in 
servitude  to  a  nation  in  which  this  form  of  worship 
prevailed,  and  to  which  they  must  of  course  have 
been  strongly  addicted ;  that  the  Egyptian  sacrifices 
included  other  animals  than  those  permitted  us 


[44] 

for  food,  and  sanctioned  the  receiving  the  blood 
in  vessels,  and  its  use  in  cookery.  And  we  can 
well  imagine,  that  the  Jewish  law  of  sacrifices  is 
intended  to  regulate  an  existing,  and  natural 
mode  of  worship,  rather  than  to  enjoin  a  new  one  ; 
and  to  prohibit  the  objectionable  features,  such  as 
the  sacrifice  of  any  animal  not  fitted  for  food,  and 
the  employment  of  the  blood  for  dietary  use. 
Remembering  all  this,  our  shocked  friend  may 
perhaps  form  a  somewhat  different  opinion  con- 
cerning ceremonial  sacrificial  worship  among  the 
Jews,  that  is  seemingly  sanctioned,  and  counte- 
nanced by  Judaism. 

But,  outside  of  this  ceremonial  no  longer  in 
vogue,  in  what  does  Jewish  ceremonial  consist? 
There  are  divers  observances  and  customs  which  are 
founded  on  hygienic  or  scientific  laws,  or  I  should 
rather  say  endorsed  by  them,  for  they  appear  as 
religion  before  they  appear  as  hygienic  or  science, 
and  which  are  stamped  with  a  religious  sanction. 
Notably  we  may  remark  the  dietary  laws,  and  the 
mortuary  rites,  which  have  been  the  means  of 
preventing  contagion,  and  the  spread  of  disease 
among  a  people  under  circumstances  which  would 
seem  to  invite  them  ;  and  to  such  an  extent  has 
the  prevention  existed,  that  the  immunity  of  the 
Jews  from  epidemics  in  all  ages  has  become 
noticeable.  There  are  some  customs,  and  observ- 
ances instituted  for  the  purpose  of  securing 
personal  and  domestic  cleanliness,  not  only  for 
its  being  a  symbol  of  inward  purity,  but  on 
account  of  its  being  in  itself  an  agent  towards 
spiritual  purity  an'd  bodily  health.  A  truth  that 
science  recognizes  in  these  days,  although  it  was 
scoffed  at  by  the  early  Christian  Church,  and  its 
opposite  assiduously  cultivated  by  its  enthusiastic 


[45] 

followers.  The  intelligence  of  the  world  now 
proclaims  the  Jewish  doctrine,  that  Cleanliness  is 
next  to  Godliness,  but  that  was  not  a  doctrine  of 
the  early  church.  Asceticism  and  dirt  were  syn- 
onymous with  sanctity,  as  we  may  learn  by  refer- 
ence to  the  lives  of  the  Saints.  Science  teaches 
to  day  that  typhus  fever  and  diphtheria  are  often 
occasioned  by  decaying  vegetable  or  animal  matter 
in  our  houses  and  cellars  ;  but  when  the  Jewish 
Rabbis  two  thousand  years  ago,  secured  the 
removal  of  all  such  fruitful  causes  of  pestilence, 
in  their  rigid  insistence  on  the  removal  of  the 
leaven  at  the  time  of  the  Passover,  the  world  failing 
to  see  the  philosophy,  called  it  superstition. 

Some  other  Jewish  ceremonials  which  may  be 
noticed,  are  the  phylacteries;  the  tzitzit,  or  fringes 
on  the  corners  of  the  garment  •  the  mezuzot  or 
inscriptions  on  the  door  posts ;  and  the  lighting  of 
the    sabbath    lamp.     All    observed   in    Israel    in 
olden  -times,  and  even  now  among  the  orthodox. 
All  may  be  utterly  meaningless  of  course,  if  perfor- 
med blindly  and  mechanically  as  mere  superstitious 
observance;  but  yet  what  a  beautiful  symbolism  do 
they  all  contain ,  and  performed  in  the  spirit  in  which 
they  were  conceived  and  instituted  •  how  expressive 
they  may  be  of  true  religion.    One  may  bind  dur- 
ing prayer  cubes  of  parchment  containing  certain 
biblical  texts,  between  the  eyes,  and  on  the  arm 
over  the  heart,  without  any  other  idea  than  the 
superstitious  literal   observance  of  a   command, 
perhaps  intended  to  be   understood  figuratively, 
or  to  be  observed  by  a  people  in  an  illiterate  condi- 
tion, as  we  see  the  beads  used  in  the  Romish  church 
by  its  devout  but  illiterate  followers.     But  what 
a  meaning  symbol  may  it  not  become,  when  before 
attending  to  any  duties  of  the  day,  before  caving 


[46] 

his  home  in  the  morning,  the  observant  Israelite 
reverently  and  not  superstitiously  performs  the 
ceremonial ;  and  if  he  should  address  no  other 
prayer  to  the  throne  of  grace,  proclaims  in  the 
prescribed  formula  the  Unity  of  God,  and  that 
he  submits  the  desires  and  wishes  of  his  heart 
to  the  Divine  will,  and  dedicates  to  the  Divine 
Service  his  senses,  his  thoughts,  and  his  in- 
telligence. Think  you,  that  there  may  be  no 
holy  influence  exercised  over  a  man's  mind,  when 
he  is  conscious  that  the  Holy  name  of  Deity  is 
woven  on  the  fringes  that  border  his  garment? 
or  when  in  his  home  he  lifts  his  eye  to  the  door 
posts  of  his  chambers,  and  is  reminded  that  the 
Divine  presence  surrounds  him,  and  that  with  all 
his  heart,  and  with  all  his  soul,  and  with  all  his 
might,  he  should  love  that  ever  present,  all 
pervading  God  and  Father,  and  diligently  teach 
the  same  to  his  children?  And  when  at  the  eve 
of  the  Sabbath  the  Jewish  wife  and  mother  in 
her  home — be  it  lowly  to  welcome  the  toiling 
artisan  or  trader,  or  palatial  to  receive  the  mer- 
chant prince  or  banker — illuminates  her  house 
by  kindling  the  Sabbath  lamp  or  candles,  how 
meaningless  may  the  ceremony  appear  ;  but  let 
her  comprehend  all  that  the  mere  ceremony  may 
symbolize  ;  let  her  realize  that  she  the  wife  and 
mother,  the  priestess  of  the  home,  is  to  tend  and 
trim  the  lamp  of  religion  in  that  domestic  temple, 
and  in  the  hearts  of  her  husband  and  sons  :  the 
flame  of  which  may  have  been  dimmed  by 
contact  with  the  world  in  the  week  of  toil  and 
strife  that  has  passed,  and  how  radiant  does  the 
dark  transparency  become ! 

Is   it  the    sanctifying  influence  of   such    ideas 
which  has  preserved  the  Jewish  home,  however 


[47] 

lowly  it  be,  from  the  vice  and  brutality  that  we 
see  existing  in  the  St.  Giles'  of  the  great  cities  of 
Christendom?  that  spares  the  Jewish  wife  and 
mother  from  the  utter  degradation  which  in 
Christian  England  enwraps  the  women  of  the 
lower  classes?  the  sickening  history  of  which  you 
may  read  in  an  article  in  one  of  the  English 
Magazines  of  last  year  under  the  title  of  "Wife 
Torture."  And  this  in  a  country  where,  forsooth, 
they  support  a  conversion  society  for  our  enlighten- 
ment and  conversion.  A  conversion  society  did 
I  say?  Let  me  rather  say  a  society  which  pur- 
chases dead  Jews,  galvanizes  them  with  Chris- 
tianity, and  parades  them  to  strengthen  the 
faltering  faith  of  its  dupes. 

Judaism  we  have  seen  uses  and  avails  itself  of 
ceremonial,  as  we  use  and  avail  ourselves  of  words 
to  express  our  thoughts,  as  we  use  some  material 
to  embody  the  flame  that  we  would  utilize  for 
heat  and  light ;  but  ceremonialism  is  not  Judaism 
as  we 'shall  presently  more  fully  see.  But  were 
Judaism  ten  times  more  -ceremonial  than  it  is  ; 
and  it  may  be  admitted  that  ceremonialism  may 
become  excessive  in  any  religion,  and  hide  or 
cover  the  spirit,  even  as  thought  may  be  lost  and 
concealed,  "as  counsel  may  be  darkened  bywords;" 
even  as  flame  may  be  extinguished  by  the  fuel  by 
which  it  is  fed  ;  yet  what  is  the  remedy  in  such 
a  case?  Is  it  to  abolish,  or  abandon  entirely  the 
religion  ?  or  is  it  not  rather  to  imitate  the  conduct 
of  the  wise  and  prudent  husbandman  whose  vine 
may  have  run  to  leaf  or  wood,  choking  and 
impairing  its  fruit  bearing  powers,  and  by  a  wise 
and  judicious  pruning  to  cut  away  the  redundancy 
of  leaf  and -wood,  to  lop  the  dead  and  dying 
branches,  but  sparing  those  yet  instinct  with  life 


[48] 

and  pregnant  with  the  luscious  grape  ?  Shall  we 
because  there  are  quirks  and  quibbles  of  the  law, 
and  technicalities  through  which  sometimes  the 
ends  of  justice  may  have  been  defeated,  therefore 
abolish  the  science  of  jurisprudence,  and  let 
anarchy  prevail,  or  commit  the  administration  of 
justice  to  the  sense  of  right  or  equity  possessed 
by  a  judge,  or  magistrate,  who  shall  resemble  an 
Asiatic  cadi  ? 

I  have  often  thought,  in  reference  to  cere- 
monialism, that  religion  in  the  minds  of  some 
men  may  very  much  resemble  a  Barmecide  feast ; 
where  the  dishes  and  the  plates,  the  decanters 
and  the  glasses,  the  knives  and  forks,  and  spoons, 
the  napkins,  and  the  finger  bowls,  each  having  its 
appropriate  use,  are  all  laid  ready  for  service  and 
the  form  of  their  use  duly  performed  ;  but  there 
is  no  soup  in  the  tureen,  no  fish,  nor  flesh,  nor 
fowl,  nor  delicate  entree  to  fill  the  plates,  no 
wine  in  the  decanters  or  glasses,  no  fruit  for  the 
dessert.  There  are  the  vessels,  there  is  the  form 
of  use — but  preterea  nihil.  But  supply  the  repast, 
and  how  all  is  changed  !  Let  the  well  cooked 
and  delicately  prepared  and  served  viands  fill  the 
platters.  Let  the  rosy  and  sparkling  wine  fill  the 
decanters,  and  flow  in  the  glasses.  Let  the  hearty 
toast  and  sparkling  jest  go  round,  and  every  form 
and  ceremony  is  filled,  and  finds  its  appropriate 
use. 

We  can  make  our  religion,  my  friends,  cere- 
monially a  Barmecide  feast ;  or  we  can  make  it  a 
satisfaction  of  the  spiritual  man,  and  fc'a  feast  of 
reason  and  a  flow  of  soul."  Ceremonialism  in  this 
sense  bespeaks  rather  an  excess  of  spirituality 
than  a  want  of  it.  The  great  mistake  we  make, 
I  think,  in  regard  to  the  ceremonialism  of  a 


[49] 

religion,  is  in  imagining  that  it  is  intended  for  all 
who  may  nominally  profess  the  religion  ;  that  all 
so  professing  it  must  necessarily  perform,  and 
fulfill  the  ceremonial ;  whereas,  the  true  idea 
would  seem  to  be,  that  he  only  who  feels  the  need 
of  the  form  or  ceremonial  to  express  the  inward 
sentiment,  should  avail  himself  of  it.  The  illiterate 
peasant  finds  but  a  small  vocabulary  necessary  to 
express  the  few  thoughts  that  arise  in  his  mind  • 
but  what  dictionaries,  and  concordances,  what 
delicate  refinements  of  language,  are  needed  to 
clothe  the  glowing  fancies,  the  poetic  imaginings, 
the  brilliant  conceptions  of  a  Shakespeare,  a 
Goethe,  a  Milton,  or  a  Longfellow?  It  was  Charles- 
Lamb,  I  think,  who  said  that  he  never  gazed  upon 
a  beautiful  scene  in  nature,  but  that  he  felt  inclined 
to  say  a  grace.  There  are  thousands  perhaps  of 
materialized  minds  who  have  gazed  upon  the 
loveliest  prospects,  in  whom  no  feeling  of  devotion 
was  awakened,  and  to  whom  the  breathing  of  a 
prayer- would  have  seemed  a  mockery;  and  yet  to 
one  whose  bosom  glowed  with  the  sentiment  the 
expression  of  it  would  have  been  a  necessity. 

That  same  quick,  keen,  religious  sensibility 
manifested  in  the  saying  of  Charles  Lamb,  had 
filled  the  hearts  of  Israel's  sages  two  thousand 
years  before  his  time,  and  they  had  "prepared  a 
form  of  blessing,  for  every  occasion  that  could 
awaken  the  sentiment  of  gratitude  and  love  to 
the  Creator  of  all.  There  was  no  occasion  nor 
circumstance  in  life  that  for  them  was  not  an 
opportunity  for  the  expression  of  that  religious 
spirit  which  filled  and  inspired  them,  but  which 
we  now-a-days  in  this  materialized  age  can  hardly 
realize.  The  glowing  thought,  the  inspiring, 
elevating  sentiment  was  there,  and  they  sought 


[50] 

for  forms  and  symbols  to  express  them.  They 
spoke  a  language,  that  perhaps,  we  more  material- 
ized understand  not  now  ;  but  let  us  not  therefore 
efface  their  writing.  We  may  someday  again 
•  discover  the  key.  The  sparkling  wine  may  not 
be  at  hand  to  fill  the  silver  flagon,  and  the  delicate 
crystal  goblet ;  but  although  we  need  not  go 
through  the  form  of  raising  the  empty  glass  to 
our  lips,  we  need  not  melt  the  tankard,  nor  break 
the  glass. 

But  while  defending  Judaism  against  the  charge 
of  excessive  ceremonialism,  I  must  not  forget 
that  there  is  a  species  of  ceremonialism,  or  what 
is  commonly  called  such,  although  in  reality  it  is 
not,  that  calls  for  some  consideration.  I  refer  to 
that  minute  excessive  observance  which  exists  in 
extreme  orthodox,  and  rabbinical  Judaism  ;  those 
minutiae,  those  excessive  refinements  and  hair 
splittings  in  which  the  rabbinical  mind  as  dis- 
played in  the  Mishna,  keen  and  ingenious  to  a 
fault  indulged.  Devising,  under  the  pious  principle 
of  making  a  fence  for  the  law,  a  system  of  minute 
and  detailed  observance  that  to  many  minds  less 
ingenious  and  critical,  would  seem  forced,  strained, 
puerile,  and  absurd ;  but  which  to  it  seemed 
perfectly  logical,  and  sanctified  by  its  enthusiastic 
fervor  the  legitimate  and  proper  regard  to  be  paid 
to  the  fulfillment  of  a  Divine  command :  forgetting 
though  that  all  mental  vision  is  not  alike,  and 
that  a  fence  might  be  raised  so  high  above,  and 
placed  so  far  beyond  the  principle  to  be  preserved, 
that  the  principle  itself  might  be  lost  sight  of 
entirely.  It  is  this  excessive  hair  splitting, 
refinement,  casuistry,  and  scrupulosity  that  has 
more  than  anything  else  within  itself,  brought 
discredit  on  the  fair  fame  of  Judaism.  A  fault 


[51] 

that  Milton  well  expresses  when  speaking  of 
certain  scrupulists,  he  says,  "  who  when  God 
hath  set  them  in  a  fair  allowence  of  way,  never 
leave  subtleizing  and  casuisting,  till  they  have 
straightened  and  pared  that  liberal  path  into 
a  razor's  edge  to  walk  upon. "  It  is  an  instance 
perhaps  in  which  the  saying  of  a  witty  French 
writer  may  toe  true,  that  "La  petite  Morale  est  enemie 
de  la  grande"  But  as  in  the  civil  law  it  is  well 
said,  " Apices  juris  non  sunt  jura"  that  curious  and 
nice  exceptions  tending  to  the  overthrow,  and 
delay  of  justice  are  not  law;  so  it  may  be  said  with 
equal  truth,  that  the  hairsplittings,  and  excessive 
refinements,  and  casuistry  of  the  rabbinical  schools 
are  not  Judaism. 

Our  examination  so  far  of  Judaism  has  shown 
us  the  negative  side;  we  have  seen  rather  what 
Judaism  is  not,  \ve  have  now  to  consider  it  on 
its  positive  side,  as  to  what  Judaism  really  is. 


There  are  two  aspects  in  which  we  may  regard 
Judaism — the  supernatural  and  the  rational.  The 
main  features  and  principles  underlying  both,  and 
in  which  Judaism  really  consists  will  be  found  how- 
ever much  the  same.  The  Supernatural,  indeed, 
may  be  but  the  glamour,  the  radiance,  the  aureole 
that  religious  veneration  is  apt  to  cast  around  an 
object  much  cherished  and  revered;  which  like 
the  bright  colors  of  sunrise  are  earthly,  and  not 
belonging  to  the  sun  itself.  When  the  artist 
depicts  on  his  canvas  an  inspired  character,  he 
paints  a  nimbus,  or  circle  of  rays  surrounding  the 
head,  to  represent  the  Divine  inspiration,  which 
like  a  halo  surrounds  the  seat  of  intelligence. 
It  is  not  very  irrational  to  suppose  that  a  similar 


[52] 

poetical  illusion  may  have  been  indulged  in 
concerning  the  sacred  writings,  and  religious 
traditions,  which  descended  to  our  fathers  as 
an  inheritance  from  time  immemorial,  sanctified 
with  the  veneration  of  a  thousand  years.  But 
what  matters  it  if  our  minds  accept  literally  the 
artistic  nimbus,  or  construe  it  to  mean  the  Divine 
inspiration  ?  What  matters  it  if  we  accept  literally 
the  statements  which  have  come  down  to  us 
through  these  years  of  veneration,  word  paintings 
perhaps  done  in  the  childhood  of  our  nation,  or 
if  our  minds  seize  the  underlying  idea  that  they 
clothe  and  convey  to  us?  What  if  some  of  us  in 
reverent  simple  credulity  accept  literally  the 
statements  that  God  spoke  unto  Moses;  or  that 
those  grand,  eternal  principles  of  religion  con- 
tained in  the  Decalogue,  were  inscribed  by  the 
finger  of  God  on  tablets  of  stone,  amidst  thun- 
derings  and  lightnings,  and  the  trembling  of  Sinai's 
mount;  or  whether  others  conceive  these  words  as 
the  mode  of  speech  poetically,  or  allegorically  ex- 
pressing the  inspiration  of  Moses,  the  Divine  and 
permanent  character  of  the  glorious  teachings,  and 
throwing  around  the  picture  a  frame  work  which 
the  poetic  mind  would  devise  as  fitting,  and  appro- 
priate to  the  idea. 

To  the  intelligent,  reverent  and  religious  mind, 
the  laws  of  God  whenever,  wherever,  or  however 
discovered,  revealed,  or  made  known  to  us,  appeal 
with  commanding  accents,  and  invite  obedience 
out  of  love  and  adoration  to  the  Supreme  First 
Cause,  as  well  as  from  their  tendency  to  promote 
our  welfare;  but  to  the  ignorant,  uncultivated 
and  simple  minds  of  a  people  but  one  or  two 
generations  removed  from  the  abject  slavery  of 
Egypt,  the  teachings  of  these  laws  by  the  inspired 


[53] 

mind  of  Moses,  the  eternal  principles  of  justice, 
morality,  and  right,  may  be  well  supposed  had  to 
be  put  into  a  more  concrete  form  to  be  grasped 
and  retained  by  their  child-like  minds.  Perhaps 
this  may  account  for  much  of  the  supernatural 
element  in  the  Bible;  but  whether  it  does  or  not, 
it  is  certain  that  it  is  of  no  great  moment  what 
our  belief  may  be  on  these  subjects,  as  long 
as  we  accept  and  fulfill  the  exalting,  ennobling 
principles  and  teachings  that  underlie  and  are 
contained  in  its  pages,  as  the  jewel  in  the  casket, 
the  kernel  in  the  husk,  the  picture  in  the  frame, 
the  kindling,  inspiring  idea  in  the  mere  uttered 
word,  the  illuminating  flame  that  burns  in  the 
lamp. 

The  Bible  with  its  cosmogony,  and  its  history 
is  not  necessarily  Judaism;  but  it  is  here,  and  in 
the  traditions  of  our  race,  and  in  the  expositions 
of  them  by  our  sages,  that  we  must  seek  for,  and 
will  find  it. 

There  is  a  talmudical  legend  that  I  find  quoted 
in  that  excellent  work  of  Rabbi  Cohen  of  Paris — 
the  Deicides — which  so  clearly  suggests  what 
Judaism  is  that  you  will  forgive  my  repeating  it. 

In  one  of  the  celebrated  academies  where  all 
the  sages  of  Israel  were  assembled,  there  arose  an 
important  discussion  between  Rabbi  Eliezer  one 
of  the  glories  of  the  Synagogue,  and  his  colleagues, 
as  to  the  interpretation  of  certain  doctrinal  matters. 
All  the  arguments  advanced  by  Rabbi  Eliezer 
had  been  unanimously  opposed  and  rejected  by 
the  other  doctors.  ' '  Well ' '  ind ignantly  exclaimed 
the  illustrious  rabbi,  "let  this  banana  part  from 
its  roots,  and  plant  itself  on  the  opposite  side." 
At  these  words,  the  tree  detached  itself  from  its 
roots,  and  planted  itself  on  the  opposite  side. 


[54] 

",What  does  that  prove?"  cried  the  doctors  with 
one  voice,  "and  what  connection  has  the  value  of 
this  banana  with  the  question  which  occupies  us?" 
"Well,"  again  exclaims  Rabbi  Eliezer,  may  the 
rivulet  that  flows  near  us,  demonstrate  the  truth 
of  my  opinion;"  and  suddenly,  oh  miracle  !  the 
waters  of  the  brook  re-ascended  to  their  source. 
"Well,"  once  more  replied  the  other  doctors 
"whether  the  waters  flow  in  one  direction  or 
another,  what  connection  is  there  between  this 
circumstance  and  the  subject  of  our  controversy?" 
"Well"  impatiently  said  Rabbi  Eliezer,  "may  the 
walls  of  this  room  serve  me  as  proof  and  testi- 
mony;" and  the  pillars  supporting  the  edifice 
bow  obedient  to  the  voice  of  their  master,  and 
the  walls  crack  and  threaten  to  overwhelm  them. 
Then  Rabbi  Schoshonah,  one  of  the  most  renowned 
sages  of  his  age,  exclaimed,  "Oh  walls!  Oh  walls! 
when  sages  discuss  the  interpretation  of  the  lawr 
what  have  you  to  do  with  their  argumentation?" 
And  the  walls  stopped  as  they  were  falling,  and 
remained  leaning  over  the  heads  of  the  doctors. 
"  May  God  Himself  pronounce  supreme  judgment," 
cried  Rabbi  Eliezer,  and  from  the  Heavenly  heights- 
the  daughter  of  the  voice  was  heard  saying,  "No 
longer  call  in  question  the  doctrine  of  Rabbi 
Eliezer,  reason  is  on  his  side."  Rabbi  SchoshonaK 
enters  his  protest;  "Neither  reason,  nor  the  law," 
cries  he,  "is  now  in  the  depths  of  the  heavens; 
neither  miracles — nor  mysterious  voices  have,  in 
our  eyes,  the  power  to  demonstrate  the  truth. 
To  human  reason,  to  the  decision  of  the  majority 
of  the  sages  of  Israel,  is  committed  the  interpre- 
tation of  Thy  law,  Oh  God!  Henceforth  they 
alone  are  the  only  powers  that  can  avail."  Not- 
withstanding the  miracles  that  were  performed,. 


[55] 

notwithstanding  the  intervention  of  the  Divine 
voice,  the  opinion  of  Rabbi  Eliezer  was  condemned 
by  the  doctors  his  contemporaries.  And  the 
Talmud  innocently  adds,  that  Rabbi  Nathan  having 
met  the  prophet  Elijah,  he  asked  him  what  had 
been  said  in  heaven  respecting  this  celebrated 
debate,  and  received  the* following  answer  :  The 
Lord  smiled  and  replied,  "my  sons  are  the 
strongest  my  sons  have  triumphed  !" 

Compare  this  rational  independence  of  thought 
with  the  miracles  of  the  church  in  the  middle 
ages,  the  winking  pictures,  the  bleeding  wafers. 
Compare  it  with  the  so  called  miracles  of  the  nine- 
teenth century — the  holy  wells — the  stigmata,  &c. 
Judaism  then  we  may  define  as  being  the  relig- 
ious teachings  of  the  Bible  rationally  expounded 
by  the  sages  of  Israel.  And  what  in  the  main 
(in  the  main,  please  observe  that  I  say,  and  not  in 
their  entirety)  those  teachings  and  expositions  are 
we  will  now  consider. 

I  have  sometimes  heard  Judaism  preached  as 
consisting  in  the  belief  in  one  God.  I  have  heard 
it  again  preached  as  consisting  of  the  fundamental 
maxim,  "Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself." 
We  find  put  into  the  mouth  of  the  great  Hillel 
when  required  to  teach  the  law  to  the  neophyte, 
while  he  stood  on  one  foot,  somewhat  similar 
teachings  ;  partial  views  of  a  grand  whole,  which 
might  accommodate  a  man  standing  on  one  leg, 
but  too  narrow  for  a  man  to  walk  on  with  two. 
But  such  partial  views  of  Judaism  no  more  repre- 
sent it  than  if  we  should  take  one  or  two  prismatic 
rays  and  call  them  "light."  It  is  not  the  red  ray, 
nor  the  blue  ray,  nor  the  violet  ray,  nor  these 
combined  that  is  light,  but  it  is  the  intimate 
mingling  and  commixture  of  all  the  prismatic 
colors  with  the  invisible  chemical  rays  that  lie 


[56] 

beyond,  which  constitute  that  life  sustaining, -all 
animating,  beautifying,  and  glorious  principle  that 
we  call  light.  Guided  by  this  analogy  we  may 
discover  what  really  is  Judaism.  We  find  in  the 
Bible — the  fountain  of  religious  light  as  the  Sun 
is  of  physical  light,  and  like  the  Sun  having  its 
incomphrensible  spots— *not  only  what  we  may 
call  religious  and  moral  laws  ;  laws  that  regulate  our 
relations  towards  God  and  our  fellow  man,  but 
side  by  side  with  these  we  find  what  we  may  call 
hygienic  laws,  dietary  laws,  political  law,  laws  of 
justice,  laws  regulating  our  relations  to  the  state, 
towards  the  dumb  animals  around  us,  and  to  the 
earth  itself  ;  all  announced  in  the  same  authori- 
tative tone,  as  of  Divine  authority,  "The  Lord 
spoke  unto  Moses."  No  difference  seems  to  be 
made  between  the  authority  promulgating  the 
moral  law,  or  that  enjoining  the  hygienic  law  ;  a 
fact  that  has  sometimes  provoked  unfavorable 
comment,  but  which  to  my  mind  has  seemed  one 
of  the  most  meaning  and  interesting  features  in 
the  Biblical  teachings.  For  are  not  all  laws, 
whether  the  moral  law,  or  social  law,  or  political 
law  in  its  grand  fundamental  principles,  on  which 
society  is  based,  as  well  as  the  laws  of  hygiene, 
by  all  of  which  mankind  must  be  governed  if  their 
welfare  and  happiness  is  to  be  secured — the  laws 
of  God?  What  indeed  is  law  of  any  kind, 
excepting  of  course  municipal  law,  but  the  mani- 
fested will  of  Deity.  Wisely  and  philosophically, 
then  does  Judaism  place  hygienic  law  on  the  same 
plane  as  the  moral  law.  Indeed  I  can  conceive 
of  instances  where  the  infraction  of  the  hygienic 
law  may  be  more  disastrous  in  its  effects  than 
that  of  the  moral  law.  To  illustrate.  Let  us 
suppose  an  infraction  of  the  moral  law  by  which  a 


[57] 

man  shall  commit  a  pecuniary  wrong  against  his 
neighbour.    In  some  transaction  in  trade,  tempted 
perhaps  by  the  necessities  of  his  family  in  need 
of  the  comforts,  or  -conveniences  of  life  that  are 
looked  upon  almost  as  necessaries,  he  wrongs^his 
neighbour  of  a  sum  of  money.     Here  is  certainly 
a  heinous  moral  wrong.  •  But  ever  regretting  the 
weakness  which  led  him  to  yield  to  the  temptation, 
he  repents  of  the  wrong  he  has  done,  and  coming 
to  the  one  he   has  defrauded,  he  expresses    his 
sorrow  'and  regret,  he  makes  restitution    to  the 
fullest  extent  with  interest,  and  punitive  damages 
as  ordered  in  the  Bible  ;    (Lev.  Oh.  5,  v.  25.)  he 
penitently   confesses   his    sin    to    his   Father   in 
Heaven,  implores  forgiveness  thereof,  and  under 
greater   tempation   he  fails  again  to  yield  ;   thus 
testifying  to  the  sincerity  of  his  repentance,  and 
sorrow.     Can  we  look  on  such  a  man  longer  as 
guilty?    Is  he  not  rather  purified  in  his  nature  by 
the  repentance  he  has  manifested,  and  its  effect 
upon  Jiim?     But  let  us  imagine  an  infraction  of 
some   hygienic  law,  or  say    even    the  continued 
infraction  of  a  dietary  law,  by  which  we   know 
scrofula  may  be  induced  in  the  system.     Let  us 
suppose  a  child  born  inheriting  such  taint,  and 
bearing  through  its  life,   shortened    perhaps   by 
such  cause,  the  terrible  evidence  of  the  entailed 
disease,   in  white   swelling,   hip  disease,  rickets, 
consumption,    or    some    other   form    of  scrofula. 
Can  all  the  sorrow,  or  penitence  of  the  parent 
make  restitution  to  the  unforutnate  child  for  the 
misery  entailed  on  it?   or  atone  for  the  wrong 
committed  against  it  ? 

Here  then,  my  friends,  we  may  see  the  beauty 
and  wisdom  of  that  religious  system  which  recog- 
nizes all  law  as  stamped  with  Divine  authority. 


[58] 

Hence  we  may  learn  in  what  Judaism  really 
consists. 

It  is  no  religion  of  sentiment  and  emotion  ;  of 
belief  and  rant ;  but  it  is  essentially  the  Religion  of 
Law.  It  is  no  jellyfish  religion,  but  a  religion 
with  a  back  bone,  to  use  a  forcible  expression  of 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Ijarns  of  this  city.  It  is  obedience 
to  law,  to  Divine  law  ;  whether  those  laws  regu- 
lating our  relations  to  our  Heavenly  Father,  our 
relations  towards  our  fellow  men,  our  duties  to 
the  state,  our  duties  to,  or  relations  towards  our 
families,  our  duties  to  ourselves,  and  reacting 
from  ourselves  to  yet  unborn  generations,  our 
relations  towards  the  animals  around  us,  towards 
the  earth  itself.  And  not  a  blind  or  selfish  obed- 
ience, but  an  obedience  yielded  out  of  love,  rever- 
ence, and  adoration  towards  the  Supreme  Law 
Giver. 

In  this  we  find  the  essential  difference  between 
Judaism  and  Deism,  between  Judaism  and  Chris- 
tianity. The  latter  being — (always  remember  my 
distinction  between  the  religion  of  Christ  and 
the  Christian  religion) — a  religion  of  belief  in 
dogma,  in  which  the  elements  of  conscience  and 
law  are  ignored,  a  religion  in  which  salvation 
is  of  belief,  and  not  of  works.  The  former 
contenting  itself  with  the  mere  acknowledgment 
of  the  existence  cf  a  Divine  Creator.  It  may  be 
a  purely  rational  and  philosophical  belief  in  God, 
essentially  and  entirely  monotheistic,  but  it  is  not 
Judaism.  It  is  not  religion.  To  use  the  analogy 
of  physical  light  before  referred  to,  it  is  but  the 
dawning  of  religious  light  on  the  mind  of  man,  to 
be  followed,  as  it  is  in  Judaism,  by  the  knowledge 
of  all  that  the  light  reveals.  For  as  the  effect  of 
material  or  physical  light  on  the  eye  of  man,  is  to 


[59] 

reveal    to  him  exterior  physical   nature,  and   to 
guide  him  in  his  relations  thereto,  so  the  object 
and  effect  of  spiritual  or  religious  light — which 
Judaism  is — is  to  reveal  to  him  exterior  religious 
objects,  or  duties,  and  to  guide  him  in  his  relations 
thereto.     And  as  man  was  created  to  exist  in  the 
world  in  common  with  other  species  of  animals, 
is  destined  to  pass  a  lengthened  life  therein,  and 
in  association  with  myriads  of  his  fellow  men, 
with  whose  interests,  affections,  sympathies,  and 
passions  his  own  are  ever  clashing  ;    and  as  his 
existence  on  earth  was  to  be  entirely  a  relative 
one,  the  spiritual  light  of  religion  was  to  reveal 
to  him  his  relations  with  all  that  share  the  earth 
with   him,  and    guide   him  in   his  relations   and 
association  with  them.     On  every  relation  of  life 
this  blessed  spiritual  gift  which  God  has  vouch- 
safed to  his  creatures  was  to  shed  its  light.     Our 
duties  towards  Him  in  our  worship  and  adoration 
of  Him,  and  in  our  obedience  to  His  commands  ; 
the  duty  of  the  parent  to  the  child,  of  the  child 
to  the  parent ;  the  duties  of  man  to  his  fellow  man 
in   the  ten   thousand  complications  of  life  ;   his 
relations  even  to  the  animal  world,  and  with  the 
earth  itself ;  all,  all  were  to  be  made  as  clear  tc 
the  soul  of  man  by  the  Divine  light  of  religion, 
as  physical  nature  to  his  eye.     And  as  material 
nature  is  beautified  by  physical  light,  even  so  was 
our  spiritual  nature  to  be  beautified,  and   made 
glorious  by  the  light  of  religion.     It  was  meant 
to  pervade  our  entire  lives  as  physical  light  per- 
vades nature ;   to  scintillate  in  our   most  trivial 
actions,  as  light  on  the  grain  of  sand  ;  to  brighten 
the  clouds  of  sorrow  with  the  rainbow  hues  of 
hope  and  consolation,  and  to  shed  sunset  glories 
on  our  departing  hours.    Thus,  and  thus  only  could 


[60] 

the  object  and  end  of  religion,  which  is  the  welfare 
and  happiness  of  man  be  attained.  The  spiritual 
light  must  guide  him  in  all  his  relations  in  this 
world,  and  in  his  hopes  and  aspirations  for  the 
next,  giving  light,  and  warmth,  and  happiness 
wherever  it  illumines. 

It  is  this  idea  of  Religion  regulating  and  gov- 
erning every  relation  of  man  in  life,  which  pervades 
the  Pentateuch  and  the  whole  Bible;  which  is 
caught  up  and  amplified  by  our  sages  to  the  fullest 
extent,  and  in  the  most  minute  detail  in  their 
comments  on  the  Scriptures,  and  the  development 
of  the  law  in  the  pages  of  the  Talmud.  It  is  this 
religious  system  of  law,  and  accountability  to  the 
Supreme  lawgiver,  and  the  worship  of  that  Supreme 
One  in  unity  and  immateriality  which  is  essentially 
Judaism.  It  is  embodied  in  that  verse  in  Deuter- 
omy  (CJi.  18,  v.  13)  the  very  key  note  of  Judaism, 
"  Perfect  shall  thou  be  before  the  Lord  thy  God." 
It  aims  at  the  perfection  of  man.  Everything 
that  can  exalt,  that  can  purify,  that  can  ennoble, 
that  can  physically  or  spiritually  conduce  to  his 
welfare,  or  benefit  is  recognized  as  religion.  The 
principle  of  the  mens  sana  in  corpore  sano  is  recog- 
nised to  the  fullest  extent,  and  as  we  have  seen, 
hygiene  and  personal  cleanliness  have  been  put 
on  the  same  plane  as  the  moral  duties.  It  aims 
at  making  every  action  of  man's  life  conform 
to  the  law  of  right.  It  would  interweave  religion 
into  the  daily  life  and  conduct  of  man,  robing 
him  like  the  high  priest  in  golden  garments  of 
service.  It  prescribes  rules  for  governing  his 
relations  with  his  fellowman  in  every  situation. 
Does  he  enter  the  commercial  mart,  or  his  counting 
room?  The  voice  speaks  to  him,  'Just  balances, 
just  weights,  a  just  ephah  shall  ye  have ;  when  thou 


[61] 

sellest  aught,  unto  thy  neighbor,  or  buyest  aught 
of  thy  neighbor's  hand,  thou  shalt  not  overreach 
one  the  other,'   (Lev.  Ch.  25,  v.  9.)  Do  we  employ 
our  fellow  man    in  our  service?     we   recall   the 
injunction;    "Thou    shalt  not   withold   anything 
from  thy  neighbor,  nor  rob  him  :    the  wages  of 
him  that  is  hired  shall  not  abide  with  thee  all 
night  until  the  morning."   (Lev.  Oh.  19.)   "On  the 
same  day  shalt  thou  give  him  his  hire,  that  the 
sun  may  not  go  down  upon  it,  for  he  is  poor,  and 
his  soul  longeth  for  it."     Deut.  Ch.  24.    Do  we  see 
our  neighbor  in  danger  of  life  or  limb?  we  re- 
member the  text,   "thou  shalt  not  stand  idly  by 
the  blood  of  thy  neighbor."    Do  we  enter  the  hallb 
of  justice  where  now-a-days  the  complaint  is  that 
corruption  prevails  and  that  the  solemnity  of  the 
oath  is  disregarded,  and  perjury  is  rife  ?     There 
could  be  neither,  were  the  Divine  command  again 
and  again  repeated  in  the  pages  of  the  law  regarded ; 
'The  judges  shall  judge  the  people  with  a  just 
judgment ;  thou  shalt  not  respect  persons  in  judg- 
ment, and  thou  shalt  not  take  a  bribe — but  justice, 
only  justice  shalt  thou  pursue,  that  thou  mayest 
live."    (Deut.  Ch.  16.)     "Thou  shalt  not  bear  false 
witness  against  thy  neighbor."     And  for  those  of 
our  profession  on  whom  much  depends  for  the 
discovery  of  the  truth,  there   is   the   wise   and 
searching   direction   and  teaching  of   our  sages; 
'*  Be  exceedingly  careful   in  the  examination  of 
the  witnesses,  and  be  cautious  of  thy  words,  lest 
they  from  them  should  learn  to  utter  falsehood." 
But  it  would  take  too  long  to  cite  even  a  portion 
of  the  numerous  precepts,  and  injunctions  regu- 
lating every  relation  of  life  according  to  the  line 
of  law  and  right.     Suffice  it  to  say  that  from  the 
exercise   of  the   loftiest  principle,  to   the  most 


[62] 

intimate,  and  private  relations  of  domestic  life  all 
is  illumined  and  regulated  for  the  welfare,  benefit, 
and  happiness  of  man,  woman,  and  child. 

And  more  than  this,  it  would  spiritualize  the 
dull  daily  incidents  of  our  lives  and  homes,  that 
our  every  act  should  be  an  act  of  worship.  Trans- 
figuring life  in  the  light  of  religion 

*         *         *         "As  a  volume  dun, 
Of  rolling  smoke,  becomes  a  wreathed  splendor, 
In  the  declining  sun." 

The  home  was  to  our  sages  a  temple ;  the 
parents  were  the  ministering  priests  ;  the  table 
an  altar,  the  meals  religious  services ;  a  holy 
influence  was  to  surround  the  young  ones  as 
they  grew  up,  that  they  might  be  fitted  to 
become  in  their  turn  members  of  that  priest- 
hood instituted  in  the  words.  ''Ye  shall  be 
unto  me  a  kingdom  of  priests  and  a  holy  nation." 

Such  my  friends  is  Judaism.  If  that  be  the 
"bundle  of  dry  and  dusty  rabbinism,  on  which 
Israel  has  lived  for  the  last  eighteen  hundred 
years,'  there  is  a  bright  and  lambent  flame  that 
may  be  perceived  around  it,  which  may  remind 
us  forcibly  of  the  burning  bush  in  the  desert ; 
and  listening,  we  may  fancy  we  hear  the  angel 
voice!  "Loose  thy  shoe  from  off  thy  foot,  for 
the  place  whereon  thou  standest  is  holy." 


But  have  I  so  far  attempted  to  paint  Judaism 
and  said  hardly  a  word  of  immortality,  or  a  future 
life?  It  would  indeed  seem  so;  and  that  in  so 
doing  I  have  but  followed  the  example  of  the 
Pentateuch,  in  which  no  decided  reference  is 
made,  nor  any  teaching  found  of  any  such  doc- 
trine. 


[63] 

And  yet  my  friends  it  is  Jewish  doctrine  ;• 
accepted,  and  taught  long  before  the  dawn  of 
Christianity;  to  evidence  which  you  have  only  to 
consult  the  pages  of  Josephus,  or  refer  to  that 
apocryphal  book,  supposed  to  be  written  about 
one  hundred  years  before  the  Christian  era,  "The 
Wisdom  of  Solomon,"  in  which  you  will  find  the 
doctrine  more  fully  announced  than  in  any  book 
of  the  Canon.  But  what  has  been  called  other- 
worldliness  is  not  a  prominent  feature  of  Judaism, 
Judaism  knows  no  everlasting  punishment.  It 
has  no  doctrine  of  Hell  and  Hell-fire.  It  has  no 
Sunday  school  heaven  of  harps  and  golden  crowns, 
to  which  the  faithful  believers  in  the  dogmas  of  the- 
church  are  instantly  translated.  It  has  no  dogmas- 
to  enforce  with  the  terrors  of  Hell,  and  Hell-fire, 
so  vividly  painted  by  the  revivalist  preacher,  to  the- 
agony  of  mind  of  young  children,  and  weakf 
minded  men  and  women,  who  are  thus  terrified 
into  submission  to  the  church.  Judaism  is  pecul- 
iarly a  religion,  the  religion  of  love.  It  is  not 
Moses,  and  our  sages  who  preach  a  religion  of  Hell- 
fire,  and  everlasting  damnation  to  the  wicked,  and 
eternal  happiness  to  the  righteous.  Religion  with 
them  was  not  to  be  a  matter  of  prudence  and 
fear.  But  it  was  simply,  "ye  shall  be  holy,  for 
I  the  Lord  your  God  am  holy."  "Thou  shalt 
love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  with 
all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy  might." 

Some  of  my  Christian  friends  would  perhaps 
like  to  say  to  me,  "and  what  of  the  temporal 
rewards,  and  punishments  spoken  of  by  Moses?" 
and  cite  as  was  once  cited  to  me  by  a  Christian 
minister  with  whom  I  was  conversing  on  this 
subject,  the  texts.  "If  you  hearken  unto  my 
commandments,  then  will  I  give  you  rain  in  its. 


[64] 

due  season ;"  "Honor  thy  father  and  thy  mother, 
that  thy  days  may  be  long  in  the  land.''  And  he 
might  have  added  one  quoted  by  me  to-night, 
'•Justice  only  justice  shalt  thou  pursue,  that  thou 
mayest  live."  To  them  I  would  reply,  as  I  replied 
to  my  clerical  friend :  Is  that  the  construction  you 
give  to  those  verses  ?  Do  you  think  if  you  are  a 
God-fearing  man  living  on  one  side  or  end  of  the 
road,  and  I  a  wicked  one  who  live  on  the  other, 
that  you  will  gather  a  crop  through  abundant 
rains,  and  mine  shall  fail  for  want  of  them?  Or  is 
it  not  rather  that  national  virtue  will  result  in 
national  blessings  of  plenty  and  prosperity,  brought 
about  in  agricultural  countries  by  the  seasonable 
rains?  Do  you -imagine  if  you  are  a  dutiful  and 
obedient  son  and  I  the  contrary,  that  you  will 
secure  a  long  life  and  I  be  cut  off  in  youth  ?  or 
lias  not  this  to  be  understood,  as  the  last  text  also, 
in  a  national  sense  ?  And  I  illustrated  my  con- 
struction thus ;  which  nation  outside  of  Israel,  I 
asked,  is  the  most  ancient  in  the  world  ?  The 
Chinese,  he  replied.  And  which  of  all  nations,  I 
asked  again,  has  shewn  the  greatest  honor  to 
parents?  Again  the  answer  was,  the  Chinese. 
With  all  their  other  vices,  and  they  are  doubtless 
many,  this  seems  to  have  saved  them. 

And  when,  my  friends,  America  closes  its  ports 
to  the  Chinese,  it  is  devoutly  to  be  hoped  that 
Young  America  will  import  with  his  teas  the 
example  of  the  Chinese  in  honor  to  parents, 
that  his  days  too  may  be  long  in  the  land  which 
the  Lord  has  given  him. 

No  !  my  friends,  Judaism  wisely  gives  no  promi- 
nence to  the  doctrine  of  future  rewards  and 
punishments.  It  realizes  that  to  the  extent  to 
which  you  introduce  this  element  into  a  religion 


[65] 

you  make  religion  a  matter  of  prudential  .consid- 
eration and  fear,  when  it  should  be  purely  a 
matter  of  love  and  gratitude.  And  on  this  point 
too,  the  world  is  Judaizing,  as  it  is  on  all  others. 
Here  is  a  little  straw,  wheat-laden,  carried  by  the 
breeze.  It  is  entitled  the  dream  of  St.  Teresa, 
and  is  from  the  pen  of  Epes  Sargent. 

"Have  you  heard  of  the  dream  she  had — 

Teresa,  the  Saintly  ? 

Come,  listen  ye  good  and  bad  ! 

And  heed  it  not  faintly. 

"A  weird,  awful  woman  she  saw, 
And  wondered  what  brought  her; 
In  one  hand  she  bore  flaming  straw  ; 
In  the  other  hand  water. 

"Where  bound"  asked  Teresa,  "Oh  tell? 

The  answer  was  given ; 

'Teresa,  I  go  to  quench  hell, 

And  then  to  burn  heaven.'  J 

'  But  why  asked  the  Saint,  do  you  make 
So  wild  an  endeavour"? 
So  that  men  for  His  own  holy  sake, 
May  love  God  for  ever." 

And  it  will  not  be  long,  my  friends,  ere  you  shall 
hear  this  doctrine  preached  as  Christian  doctrine, 
and  the  protest  of  Judaism  to  the  contrary  doc- 
trine for  eighteen  hundred  years  shall  be  entirely 
ignored.  And  the  rugged,  battered,  bruised,  but 
still  indomitable,  unconquerable  old  warrior — 
Judaism — when  he  hears  it,  will  smile  in  the  pride 
of  his  conscious  sense  of  strength,  of  right,  and 
of  final  victory  for  the  truth  that  he  represents,  as 
he  may  be  supposed  to  have  smiled  when  a  Rev. 
Bishop  preached  lately  in  this  city  that  the  world 
was  indebted  to  Christianity  for  the  Sabbath. 
To  Christianity— forsooth— for  the  Sabbath  !  To 
that  which  had  scoffed  at  it,  trampled  on  it,  would 


[66] 

none  of  it,  had  stigmatized  it  as  one  of  the  beggarly 
elements  of  the  Jewish  law,  a  carnal  observance 
of  the  Jew,  and  had  abolished  it  by  an  early  council 
of  its  church ;  andwhen  the  statement  was  received 
by  an  otherwise  intelligent  audience  in  their 
gaping  religious  credulity  with  acclamation.  Or  if 
the  stern  old  warrior  had  allowed  a  word  to  escape 
from  his  close  set  lips,  there  would  have  burst 
forth  from  his  pent  up  indignation — as  addressed 
to  the  Church  represented  by  the  Churchman ; 
'  My  doomed  foe  !  thou  ever  wert,  thou  ever  wilt 
be — a  falsity.' 

But,  perhaps,  the  Reverend  Bishop  thought 
that  Christianity  in  this  country  might  lay  claim 
to  the  institution  by  at  least  a  Sabbatical  observ- 
ance of  the  idolatrous  Roman  Suns-day — the 
day  of  Apollo — the  dies  Soils — and  as  no  such 
title  by  observance  of  the  Divinely  appointed  day 
could  be  shown  by  the  Israelites  at  large,  the 
title  never  would  be  disputed.  Christianity,  my 
friends,  has  learned  a  great  deal,  and  has  yet  to 
learn  a  great  deal  more  from  Judaism  ;  but  on  the 
other  hand,  we  Jews  may  learn  many  excellent 
religious  lessons  from  the  example  of  pious  Chris- 
tians. The  track  does  not  make  the  locomotives, 
nor  the  rolling  stock  ;  and  there  may  be  very 
excellent  locomotives  and  stock  on  the  wrong 
track,  and  very  poor  ones  on  the  right.  And  if 
the  track  is  a  very  long  one,  and  the  deviation 
not  easily  discernible,  it  is  hardly  to  be  wondered 
at?,  in  such  a  case,  if  passengers  are  misled  into 
taking  the  wrong  one.  But  to  resume  after  this 
little  digression. — 

Judaism  invests  the  natural  transition  called 
death  with  no  terrors,  nor  professes  to  hold  the 
keys  of  heaven  and  hell,  and  barter  salvation  for 


[67] 

allegiance.  The  beautiful  maxim  of  Spinoza  is  a 
truly  Jewish  one,  that  the  proper  study  of  a  wise 
man  is  not  how  to  die,  but  how  to  live  ;  and  that 
there  is  no  subject  on  which  a  wise  man  will  think 
less  than  death.  It  is  Jewish  doctrine,  too,  and 
true  philosophy  that  the  child  is  the  father  of  the 
man  ;  to-day,  the  parent  of  to-morrow  ;  the  mortal 
man  the  father  of  the  spiritual  man.  Prepare 
thyself,  say  our  sages,  in  the  ante-chamber  that 
thou  mayest  be  fitted  to  enter  the  dining  room. 
No !  the  doctrine  of  immortality  and  a  future  life 
is  rather  hinted  at,  and  suggested  in  the  Bible  than 
announced.  It  belongs  to  those  secret  things 
which  pertain  to  the  Lord  ;  for  us  are.  only  the 
revealed,  to  perform  all  the  words  of  His  law. 
But  we  are  instinctively  conscious  of  it  in  our 
moments  of  highest  aspiration  ;  it  is  whispered  to 
us  in  the  analogies  of  nature  ;  it  speaks  to  us  in 
the  very  genius  of  our  language.  Did  it  ever 
occur  to  you  that  the  Hebrew  expression  signify- 
ing for  ever  and  ever  (c^ij/n  "iy  c'piyn  )o) ,  literally 
translated  means  from  world  unto  world  ? 

With  the  knowledge  of  the  infinity  of  worlds  that 
astronomy  has  revealed  to  us,  what  a  vista  of  pro- 
gress for  the  human  soul  do  the  words  open  to  us  ! 

"  She  desires  no  isles  of  the  blest,  no  quiet  seats  of 

the  just, 

To  rest  in  a  golden  grove,  or  bask  in  a  summer  sky ; 
Give  her  the  wages  of  going  on,  and  not  to  die." 

This  then,  my  friends,  is  Judaism ;  or  rather,  these 
are  some  of  the  teachings  of  Judaism;  that  purest, 
most  rational,  most  practical  of  all  religions,  to  the 
heritage  of  which  we  as  Jews  are  born.  This  is 
the  religion  which  divested  of  its  national  features, 
is  gradually  superseding  that  dogmatic  Christianity 
to  which  Judaism  has  ever  been  the  foe.  With 


[68] 

the   religion    of  Christ,  which   is  but  a  form  of 
Judaism,    and    a    more    orthodox    form    than    is 
possessed  by  many  so  called  Jews  of  the  present 
day,  Judaism  has  little  difference,  no  feud.      But 
with  the  Christian  religion,  with  its  pagan  element 
of  man  worship  ;  its  Trinity  ;  its  vicarious  atone- 
ment ;  its  doctrines  of  faith  above  righteousness,  of 
salvation  by  belief  and  not  by  works  ;  announced 
in  the  new" testament  thus,  "If  thou  shalt  confess 
with  thy  mouth  Jesus  the  Lord,  and  shalt  believe 
in  thy  heart  that  God  hath  raised  him  from  the 
dead,  thou  shalt  be  saved."  (Romans  Ch.  10.)  In  the 
Nicene  creed  by  the  remission  of  sins  through  bap- 
tism ;  and  by  Luther  the  great  luminary  of  the 
Protestant  Church  in  the  following  unmistakable 
terms,  "a  Christian  cannot  if  he  will,  lose  his  sal- 
vation by   any   multitude    or   magnitude  of  sins 
unless  he  ceases  to  believe.     For  no  sins  can  damn 
him  but  unbelief  alone.    Everything  else,  provided 
his  faith  returns,  or    stands   fast   in   the   Divine 
promise  given  in  baptism,  is  absorbed  in  a  moment 
by  that  faith:"* — a  doctrine,  a  monstrous  doctrine, 
which  for  the  last  fifteen  hundred  years  has  hung 
like  a  heavy  drag  on  the  moral  progress  of  mankind, 
and  is  responsible  for  more  vice  and  crime,  corrup- 
tion and  immorality  in    the  world  than   we  can 
dream  of ; — With  this,  Judaism  in  the  interests  of 
humanity,  has  an  unending  war  ;  a  war  unto  death  ; 
a  warfare  of  Amalek  from  generation  unto  gener- 
ation.    And  like  the  battle  with  Amalek,  it  is  one 
wherein    when    Moses   lifts  up   his    hands    Israel 
prevails,  and  when  the  hands  of  Moses  are  suffered 
to  droop  Amalek  prevails.     And  like  the  battle 
with  Amalek,  it   is  one    in  which  our  clergy    as 
representing  Aaron,  and  our  laity  as  representing 

(*  Luther  de  Captiv.  Bab.    Sec  Mohle's  Symbolik.) 


[69] 

Hur  must  each  perform  his  part  in  sustaining  the 
uplifted  hands  of  Moses.  And  again  like  the  battle 
with  Amalek,  it  is  one  in  which  the  foe  will  be  dis- 
comfited ; — but  with  this  difference,  that  as  Israel 
fights  not  his  spiritual  battles  with  the  sword,  the 
discomfiture  will  be  not  mn  ""D*?,  but  •>£  inn*? — not 
with  the  edge  (Heb  mouth)  of  the  sword,  but  with 
the  sword  of  the  mouth. 

\Vhether  that  Judaism  which  I  have  painted  to 
you  is  the  religion  of  the  Jew  of  the  present  day  ; 
whether  all  Israel  basks  in  the  glorious  sunshine  ; 
whether  there  are  not  many,  very  many  dark 
places  into  which  the  glad  sunlight  does  not 
come  ;  How  much  has  been  shut  out  by  the  walls 
of  the  Ghettos  in  which  Christians  immured  us  for 
centuries  ;  Whether  we  in  the  past  or  the  present 
have  been,  or  are  its  true  exponents;  you  can  judge 
perhaps  as  well  as  I ; — but  it  is  none  the  less  Juda- 
ism. Our  language  would  not  be  the  less  Hebrew, 
though  few  should  speak  it  or  understand  it.  Our 
religion  is  not  the  less  Judaism,  though  few  may 
practice  it  in  its  completeness.  And  it  is  Judaism 
I  paint  and  not  its  professors.  It  is  the  light  I 
exhibit,  and  not  the  lamp  in  which  it  burns. 

To  the  extent  that  we  are  its  exponents  we  are 
true  Jews;  fulfilling  our  destiny  as  a  kingdom  of 
priests  and  a  holy  nation.  And  well,  indeed,  may 
we  be  proud  of  the  title,  as  a  title  of  honor  and 
nobility  dating  back  to  days  long  anterior  to  those 
of  Roman  and  Grecian  civilization;  anterior  by 
many  centuries  to  the  earliest  sages  of  Greece, 
who  probably  drew  their  inspiration  from  Israel's 
fount.  It  may  be  made  by  our  enemies  a  term  of 
reproach ;  it  may  be  rendered  by  ourselves  a  word 
of  reproach  ;  but  to  us  it  should  be,  and  by  us  it 
should  be  made  the  highest  title  of  honor,  and  not 


[70] 

one  of  reproach.  Realizing  and  truly  fulfilling  our 
exalted  mission,  and  certainly  not  otherwise,  we 
should  feel  and  make  the  intelligence  of  the  world 
acknowledge  that  a  man  should  need  no  Honorable 
before  his  name,  if  he  was  privileged  to  put  the  Jew 
after  it.  I  say  the  intelligence  of  the  world,  because 
with  its  ignorance  and  especially  its  religious  ignor- 
ance, we  can  have  no  hope,  remembering  what 
Erskine  says  in  one  of  his  speeches;  " There  is  a 
martyrdom  of  truth  in  every  age,  and  the  world  is 
only  purged  from  ignorance  by  the  innocent  blood 
of  those  who  have  enlightened  it."  And  the  blood 
of  martyrdom,  my  friends,  is  not  always  red  ;  there 
is  a  martyrdom  of  scoffing,  abuse,  contumely,  con- 
tempt, and  social  ostracism,  at  which  galling  though 
it  may  be,  the  martyr  for  truth  must  not  wince. 

Robert  South,  an  eminent  Divine  of  the  time  of 
Charles  the  2d  of  England,  speaking  of  the  per- 
versity of  the  Israelites  of  yore,  observes,  "God 
seems  to  have  espoused  them  to  himself  upon 
the  very  same  account  that  Socrates  espoused 
Xantippe  ;  as  the  fittest  argument  both  to  exercise 
and  declare  his  admirable  patience  to  the  world." 
But,  if  one  may  presume  to  assign  a  reason  for  the 
Divine  selection  of  the  Israelites,  other  than  that 
which  the  Bible  itself  declares  ;  I  should  rather 
imagine  it  might  be  said,  that  the  Almighty  selected 
them  for  the  purpose  of  exibiting  to  the  world, 
what  pure  religion  might  do  for  man.  Without 
it,  they  were  the  abject  degraded  Egyptian  slaves, 
hankering  after  the  flesh  pots  of  Egyptian  bondage 
in  the  very  sight  and  possession  of  glorious  liberty ; 
but  enlightened  and  purified  by  the  knowledge  and 
observance  of  the  Divine  laws,  they  were  to  become 
the  kingdom  of  priests — the  holy  nation,  children 
of  God,  as  the  Bible  speaks  of  them.  (EoseaCh.  22.) 


[71] 

We  may,  my  friends,  devoid  of  the  elevating, 
purifying,  and  ennobling  principles  of  Judaism, 
or  starved  upon  its  mere  husk  or  shell,  exhibit 
ourselves  still  to  the  world  in  the  light  of  the 
degraded  Egyptian  slave,  sunken  in  material 
gratifications,  and  worshipping  a  calf  of  gold,  in 
the  sight  of  the  pillar  of  light  which  is  to  guide'  us 
in  our  way  through  the  world.  Slaves, — though 
clothed  in  broadcloth,  decked  in  diamonds,  or 
rolling  in  wealth,  as  was  many  a  Roman  slave, 
and  operating  with  the  ignorance  of  the  world, 
make  the  name  of  Jew  a  byword  and  a  reproach  ; 
fulfilling  in  ourselves  the  prophecy  "  Ye  shall  be 
a  proverb  and  a  byword  among  the  nations  of  the 
earth."  Or  performing  in  all  things  the  glorious, 
'  ennobling  teachings  of  our  Jewish  faith,— of 
Judaism  ;  fed  with  the  full  plump  grain,  the  very 
staff  of  spiritual  life  we  may  become  truly  a 
Kingdom  of  priests,  a  holy  nation,  and  operating 
with  the  enlightenment  of  mankind,  make  the 
name  of  Jew  an  honor  and  a  praise  and  fulfill 
in  ourselves  the  prophecies, 

"And  it  shall  come  to  pass  instead  that  people 
say  of 'them  'Ye  are  not  my  people,  they  shall 
call  them  the  sons  of  the  living  God.'"  (Hosea 
Oh,  l,v.  10.) 

"And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  in  the  same  degree  as 
ye  have  teen  a  curse  among  the  nations,  0  house  of 
Israel  !  and  house  of  Judah  !  even  so  will  1  save 
you,  and  ye  shall  be  a  blessing."  (Zech.  Ch.  8,  v.13.) 
That  which  may  lift  us  from  the  degradation  to 
the  exaltation,  from  the  disgrace  to  the  glory  ; 
operating  with  the  enlightenment  of  mankind,  in 
which  we  have  the  most  vital  interest,  and  to 
which  we  should  bend  our  untiring  energies,  is 
simply — JUDAISM. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  AT  LOS  ANGELES 
THE  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 
if  T>TTR  "n  the  1"' ' 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

305  De  Neve  Drive  -  Parking  Lot  17  •  Box  951388 

LOS  ANGELES,  CALIFORNIA  90095-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library  from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


OCT  0  8  2007 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


Univer 

Soul 

Lit 


